Fuck Assad, take him and his generals out.

[denbot]

There are lines that should not be crossed. Slaughtering your own population is one, using chemical weapons to do it is most definitely a big one.

Going to war solely to secure another countries resources under the guise of protecting the population was and is wrong. Standing on the sidelines while a regime slaughters it's population is also wrong.

The pollyannish myopia, that professes that all military action is immoral, even if it is the only way to stop brutish wholesale massacres, is as immoral, and is no different, then actually acquiescing the slaughter.

Whether or not we should be the world's policeman is a moot point, as we have amassed so much military might, that role is also part of the cost of our hunger for force dominance.

War is base and savage, we excell at it. Hit at all command and control assets as efficently as possible.

It is our moral duty

[GeorgeGist]

1. Innocent until proven guilty ...

is such bullshit. Right?

[notadmblnd]

2. We got us another one folks!

on edit: we're not pollyanna, the talking point lable has been changed. We're now referred to as "Peace Purests"

C'mon, get with the program. Did your pals not send you the memo?

[Saboburns]

3. It's not my moral duty

Lobbing tons of high explosives from afar will kill many people, most of those to be killed don't deserve to be killed.

Sorry, to me that's the opposite if moral.

[Scootaloo]

4. So long as you ride the first bomb in, cowboy n/t

[Ernesto]

27. K&R for sure! nt

[wild bird]

49. Just like Slim Pickens.

[steve2470]

136. agreed ! nt

[AsahinaKimi]

156. Shock and Awe shucks....

no thanks. War, what is good for?...Absolutely nothing.

[leftstreet]

5. Oh man. The war pornicators are getting major stiffies n/t

[bobduca]

134. Its their moral duty to masturbate over syrian war plans

[MrMickeysMom]

181. They'll need this, then....

[trumad]

6. Keyboard Warriors....

Ugg

[denbot]

12. Two Persian Gulf tours hardly make me a keyboard warrior.

Ugg, indeed.

[denbot]

46. That is a diagnosis from the West Los Angeles V.A. Hospital.

And your point was?

[leveymg]

48. I'll withdraw my comment.

[denbot]

51. Too bad, I thought it was funny

Seriously, it made me giggle.

[leveymg]

55. Someone thought it was a bit rough. So, next round's on me!

Last edited Wed Aug 28, 2013, 01:05 AM - Edit history (1)

[rdharma]

18. What units?

Hmmmmmm?

Don't believe you.

BTW - I'm a young minority female owner of a small business who loves to listen to all sides of political arguments on the internet!

[denbot]

50. I'm a host of the DU Veterans group.

Whether you believe if I served or not is not a concern of mine.

FWIW I am also a minority (Apache) business owner, and I also listen to both sides of most arguments.

[rdharma]

74. I didn't say you didn't serve..... I was asking where, when, level of intelligence access.

Sure, I believe you. Although you avoided answering the question. Why is that? I didn't ask you about detailed current order of battle information. I'm wondering why you're avoiding that question.

[denbot]

105. I was an Operations Specialist, Operations Intelligence Division on a Guided Missile Destroyer.

I was also the C.I.C's ComTac Publications Petty Officer. Which meant I handled the classified publications, and crytographic keys. My Battle Station was as the F.A.P. ( Fast Action Proceedure Talker (pronounced Phap net talker). It was my job to communicate all of my ships tactical information to other non-NTDS ships, while maintaining the main tactical display board in the CIC (Combat Information Center) with a grease pen, backwards (I stand behind the board so I have to write all the information backwards), in real time.

Did any of that make sense to you?

[rdharma]

107. More than three decades ago?

Yeah. That makes sense.

Things have changed a bit in the meantime.

[denbot]

109. Yes, we have gotten far better, and even in the last 10 years, far more accurate

Shock and Awe was for show. Good intelligence, and precision weapons can work.

[rdharma]

113. I don't think the intelligence about WMDs in Iraq was good.

Do you?

[denbot]

117. No it was all bullshit

I protested both Iraq wars, here on DU and in the streets. I was also pro intervention in Bosnia, which was opposed by conservatives. They were pro-ethnic cleansing, on pre DU political boards.

[rdharma]

111. What's a "grease pen"?

Is that some type of high-speed low-drag intelligence equipment? I'm impressed.

[kwassa]

116. Why the snark?

Do you have a point?

[denbot]

118. A grease pen is what is used to write on a tactical display

The display boards clear lucite, and are internally lit, so the information is highly visible.

[kwassa]

125. That I know.

I've used grease pencils myself.

I don't understand the questioning of rdharma.

[rdharma]

159. I was trying to point out the age of the OP's info. Maybe unfairly.

You decide. I don't want any attack on Syria.

[kwassa]

172. War is war, regardless of when it happens.

The age of the info is of no significance

I've lately been reading personal reminisces of Civil War veterans, highly educated, literate, very smart. War is horror, that's all. That is what is going on in Syria right now.

Attempting to discredit the OP based on WHEN he experienced it is absurd.

[rdharma]

179. No it's not. Intelligence is current.

What happened three decades ago is irrelevant.

[penultimate]

155. FAP.. Phap Net... teehee teeeheee.

I'm such a child.

[JimDandy]

226. We have to find laughs where we can...

even in serious situations.

[wild bird]

62. Don't you love these Keyboard Warriors?

[trumad]

19. Oh--- Sorry...

You'd think two tours would make you think about killing more people.

I'll stick with keyboard warrior.

[rdharma]

23. I'm waiting to hear what units this guy served with.

And I'm sure he can tell me where and when!

[mimi85]

75. If he said he served

that's good enough for me. Are you calling him a liar? Methinks an apology is in order. He has no reason to prove anything to you.

[rdharma]

85. And I have no reason to believe him!

Or believe he had information at a level that would allow him to form an accurate assessment of the situation in Syria.

[atreides1]

103. Nope, not good enough

I served for 13 years active duty, volunteered for Desert Storm...I can remember every unit I was assigned to and each of the 3 MOS's that I held in those 13 years!

And I don't give a free pass to someone just because they say, they were in the military!

[denbot]

110. I posted my MOS

Good enough yet?

[lumpy]

82. Disgusting.

n

[rdharma]

91. No answer disgusting?

[Bobbie Jo]

167. +1

[NCTraveler]

224. +1 nt

[sibelian]

249. No, they make you a violence-addicted idiot.

Nice try.

[NightWatcher]

7. He gassed (wink) between 300&1500, a US war will kill those times factors of ten or hundred

Plus the people who would step in are Al Qaeda or related sympathizers. Killing a couple thousand is terrible, but we'd kill hundreds of thousands in a protracted campaign.

It's not our "moral duty" to kill hundreds of thousands and destabilize a country in the most volatile part of the planet.

[denbot]

20. Hitting command and control assests are the point.

Think Bosnia, not Gulf War I & II.

[rdharma]

24. A lot of civilians killed in "allied" bombings in Bosnia.

Not too "precision"!

Where did you serve and when? ........ Or did you forget?

[HooptieWagon]

81. Hitting command and control assets....

....will not eliminate chemical weapons or prevent their use. In fact, they might be used more often, and in retaliation against US allies like Turkey and Israel.
The Syrian civil war is a big clusterfuck, but pouring gasoline on it won't improve the situation.

[denbot]

112. That is a valid argument.

I think it is morally wrong to stand by and do nothing.

[HooptieWagon]

129. The #1 moral obligation is not to make the situation worse....

...or cause it to spread to neighboring countries. Sometimes that means staying out of the fight. That doesn't mean doing nothing....is the US doing anything to help deal with refugees, or helping neighbors keep their borders secure?

[denbot]

135. Very good point.

At what point is the human cost too high to not do nothing?

[HooptieWagon]

171. When one side signals they've had enough.

At that point the US can prevent a slaughter and enforce a ceasefire. As long as both sides are determined to fight, and neither side is friendly to US, our involvement will only lead to an escalation of the conflict and its spreading to neighboring countries (which are barely stable themselves).

[SomethingFishy]

8. So killing 100,000 with bombs and guns is not crossing "the line"

but killing 1400 with chemical weapons is.

Got it. I can't wait to explain to my children how those 100,000 didn't count because they were killed with the wrong type of weapon.

[Octafish]

96. Want numbers? How's a million dead in Iraq?

They had nothing to do with the attacks of September 11. Nothing.

[denbot]

108. I agree and I protested against the Iraq war.

I was for rolling up the Taliban in the hunt for Osama. If we took him out at Tora Bora then we should have left. Chehney's regime had other plans.

[quinnox]

9. Oh hell, just nuke 'em all!

USA! USA! USA!

[HardTimes99]

10. USA, Fuck Yeah! :sarcasm: <--Poe's Law - nt

[dawg]

161. America!

Don't listen to or watch this video. It is very rude.

You were warned!

[denbot]

206. You haven't been around long so I'll finish your post..

Narwhals!!!

( Ask an old timer )

[cali]

11. No. It is not "our moral duty"

Do you have a clue as to what the potential ramifications are?

Let me help:

a wider conflagration in the region

further destabilization of countries in the middle east and north africa

genocide of Alawites

ethnic cleansing of Christians

attacks on Israel

Iran involvement

worsening relationships with Russia and China

pushing Iraq into civil war


First do no harm.

We have seen the result of 60 years of the U.S. intervening in the Middle East. How's that worked out so far?

[denbot]

25. That whole region is in flux.

What will come whether we take any action or not is unknowable. What is a known factor is the brutality of the Assad regime, and our ability to intervene.

[cali]

44. oh, it's pretty knowable.

it's hardly a mystery.

Libya: a fucking mess

Iraq: a fucking mess

afghanistan: a fucking mess.

[Scootaloo]

47. We actually know exactly what will happen

while the fine details are unknowable, here's what will happen if we "take out Assad"

1) Baathist policy encourages hard competition between the different branches of the military and between commanding officers. This is a method to keep the armed forces politically self-crippled and ensure the primacy of Assad (or formerly, Hussein.) With Assad removed, this culture will remain, and the Syrian armed forces will fragment and factionalize. Without an "official" government to support them, and with the knowledge that even if they had the political ability to take the lead, the invading West would just bar them anyway, they join one section of the insurgency or another.

2) The insurgency groups, bolstered by the influx of soldiers, does not solidify into a new government - quite the opposite. They continue to fight each other, but with even bloodier results. Syria descends into a new depth of civil war, possibly with the Kurdish northeast as the only "stable" area (and unlike Iraqi Kurds, they are unlikely to shelter NATO operations.) Nevertheless, NATO will crown one faction or another the "Official" government, whose authority will probably only exist either outside Syria, or within a few portions of Damascus

3) Several of these insurgent groups are going to point their guns at the interfering Westerners - or just go the easy way out and start firing on Israel, as they've said they would. Unable to identify which groups are doing what - since most of the groups themselves probably can't - NATO forces content themselves with going after whatever insurgent targets are on the screen. These attacks could very well include chemical weapons, as we already know the rebel groups have them and have used them.

What you are advocating is not going to achieve what you hope it will achieve. No one will be "saved" by "taking out" Assad and his generals under current conditions.

[Laelth]

225. Very likely. Well said. n/t

-Laelth

[4Q2u2]

229. See Lebanon

Once the Emerald of the Middle East a great example of multiple religions and ethnicities living together in peace and prosperity. Then the hard core militants showed up and the rest is history. It has been decades on decades in which that country is still War torn and a shadow of it's self. Would you sentence the people of Syria to a lifetime of sorrow and despair. Unresolved conflicts will fester forever. Resolution will come from within, you may not like the road that it travels down, but that is what must happen. No outside force can directly dictate resolution to waring factions(without total annihilation of one side). They will not accept those terms and fighting will not cease. It may be piecemeal but the civilians trapped in that cycle will suffer for decades and not gain THEIR self realization. They will survive but not live.


I served in Iraq on the ground. Not in a Billion Dollar Suit of Armor hundreds of miles away from the front, sipping my coffee while wearing my foul weather jacket because the AC in the CIC was so cold. I was in the last one. All of us need to sit this one out.

[wild bird]

233. From an old man,

thank you for your service.

U.S. Marine Corps
3rd. Batt. 26th Marine Regiment
Khe Sanh
Quang Tri Province
Republic of Vietnam
1967-1968

[4Q2u2]

235. I See

I see Uncle Sam sent you to all the best resorts. Thank you for your service Brother.

From an almost old man


U.S. Navy Sea Bees
Mutli-Forces West
1st Marine Expeditionary Force
1st MLG
Al Assad
Al Taquaddum 08-09

[wild bird]

240. U.S. Navy Sea Bees?

We had some Navy Sea Bees attached to our batt., some of the best construction, engineers and rifleman I ever knew, these guys were right there in the shit with us.

I love you guys.

Welcome home brother, glad you made it.

[4Q2u2]

242. Love the Marines

We always get assigned to Marines line units in the Combat Zones. I loved that, we got rid of the Fleet mentality and back to what we knew and do best.

[wild bird]

243. What was your MOS? If that's what they call it in the Navy.

We had a couple of EO's, a couple of CE's, and if I remember correctly, one or 2 CM's.

[4Q2u2]

246. We call them Rates in the Navy

I was a CM Construction Mechanic. My duties were Convoy Security though. Drove all over Iraq, lovely roads called IED Alley and Sniper Street. Had one town near the base that was 5,000 yrs old and the sewer system was open cut canals. You could smell the town miles before you got there.

[rdharma]

13. Get your butt down to the recruiter's office!

[denbot]

21. Like I said up thread, I served, and did two tours in that region.

Your point?

[rdharma]

28. Like I said.

I don't believe you. Units? Dates?

Oops! I guess that stumped you!

[wild bird]

58. I don't believe you.

ANY combat vet would NOT be cheerleading for military action.

U.S. Marine Corp
3rd. Batt. 26th Marine Regiment
Khe Sanh
Quang Tri Province
Republic of Vietnam
1967-1968

I bared mine, now bare yours.

[denbot]

73. USS Barney DDG-6

Two tours in the Gulf, one just before the Shah was disposed and one during most of the ladder part of the Iranian Hostage crisis up until the day the hostages were released.

My cousin Lenny Carnegieham served with you there. I wonder if you guys ever met?

[wild bird]

78. You served on a ship?

So you have no idea what down and dirty combat is really like?
No wonder your so eager to call for military action.

No, I didn't know him.

[denbot]

87. Dude, my grandfather was on the USS Kallinin Bay during the battle off Samar, WWII.

During my turn, I honestly did not think we would survive the first salvo, cruising the straights, 5-6 mile from the Iranian coast, and most of my crew mates in the CIC shared my pessimism.

Still we did or duty, and worst came to worst we all would have given a good account of ourselves, as per the traditions of th U.S. Navy.

[sibelian]

250. Pf!

And?

[rdharma]

101. On a ship and more than four decades ago! nt

[rdharma]

100. The Shah and the hostage crisis?

That was back in the late 1970s!

[bobduca]

132. Yeah everyone knows that you can't argue against war with a veteran

[denbot]

139. At no point did I say or infer that.

What was your point in pretending that I did?

[bobduca]

144. Its your "get out of argument" card

I know, I know we all must pretend that we supported the illegal wars and tie yellow ribbons to "support the troops" while working "against the war"

It's my moral duty to call out bias and bullshit when its masquerading as "moral duty"

[denbot]

147. No yellow ribbons on our cars ever.

How is doing nothing the moral high ground?

[bobduca]

149. Yeah, we might as well call it moral, since we have all this power

...we might as well take AMERICA TO THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY /cue cheesy 80's rock guitars.

Now with BIPARTISAN support!

[denbot]

152. Umm.. Hyperbole much?

Why, then is it morally right to do nothing?

[bobduca]

154. No hyperbole, just riffing off of your macho OP subject line

I want to see your battle plans... I bet they are FUCKING AWESOME and involve a crazy number of safe-to-personel-in-theater cruise missiles!

[denbot]

166. Please, do you really think it's moral to do nothing.

I know you would at least call the cops if your neighbor was running around his yard chopping up his kids. Is it a numbers game with you? Is it geographical?

At what point would my analogy fall through?

[bobduca]

169. At no point was your analogy coherent

[denbot]

178. Assad is most definitively running around "chopping up his kids".

We are for better or worst the only sheriff in town. Do you think it moral to let him savage his own people?

[bobduca]

195. I think it would be

I think its immoral to wade into Syria with cruise missiles no matter how much you war boosters say it is.

[denbot]

199. So letting people being slaughtered is in your opinion moral..

I disagree.

[Marrah_G]

247. On a ship

against countries without navys..............

If you had seen actual combat you would not be cheerleading the deaths of more of our men and women and more civilians in Syria.

My Brother is a Naval Captain:
Guess where he felt totally safe: on his ship
Guess where he didn't: on the ground in Iraq for a year.

[treestar]

61. this is the obverse of the right wing argument

that you must support all wars or be against the troops. That you must oppose all wars or be one of the troops yourself. Thus are all people over the hill to be without opinion on the subject?

[denbot]

122. Yes it is a right wing point of view.

It is also one I do not advocate.

[leveymg]

14. To some, cause for war needs no moral justification or real proof. Sigh.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

16. So you condone the slaughter of civilians if the rescuer isn't sufficiently altrusitic?

What a bizarre characterization of morality.

[denbot]

126. At what point did I condone killing civilians?

I'm not sure I understand your statement.

[Warpy]

17. Our moral duty is to stay the hell out.

All military action does is kill people and build resentment.

If Assad is gone and the military doesn't put up another strongman, Syria is likely to go the way of other countries in the region with power vacuums and we'll end up with another Iran. Uh, no thanks.

For once, we need to let the rest of the world do the job if there is one to be done.

We can't afford it for one thing, not as long as the wealthy pay too little tax to keep up our imperial military.

[VanillaRhapsody]

86. if a nuke was used? What would be your response then?

What's your feeling on the U.S. intervention in WWII?

[Warpy]

151. You are just getting silly, desperate for an argument

I'll leave you to slide down the slippery slope while you create castles out of air and try to make an apple an orange.

[mythology]

174. You clearly said "All military action does is kill people and build resentment"

thus the logical conclusion to your argument is that no military action can ever be good. When you got called on it, you resort to name calling.

It's simplistic thinking to say that military action is incapable of being good or the opposite and military action is always a good thing.

[bobduca]

170. Sofa King Stupid

When the Pros are away the pro-war pro-nsa crew really has nothing...

[Union Scribe]

176. Way to go all Cheney on this thing.

"We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

[denbot]

191. That was kinda funny..

I'm stealing your Cheney line..

[DisgustipatedinCA]

22. Where are your North Korean attack plans?

Those people are certainly suffering. Why do we have a moral duty to attack Syria, but no moral duty to attack North Korea?

[denbot]

31. The cost, and our ability to effect change.

North Korea is not at or near a tipping point. Syria is at a critical juncture, and the cost of intervention in both lives and treasure is far lower then it would be in N. Korea.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

34. OK. We have a moral duty to save people as long as it's not too expensive. Got it.

[denbot]

123. No we have a moral duty to act if we can effect change.

When I speak of costs, I also include human, and oppertunity costs.

[X_Digger]

26. And what do you leave behind, eh?

A bunch of assholes would do the same (or worse)?

[denbot]

36. Thar be the rubb.

What is better, the devil you know, or one you don't?

[Douglas Carpenter]

29. "Christians to Beirut and Alawites to the grave" - this is all going to work out just so well -

[former9thward]

30. "it is our moral duty"

Since its OUR moral duty I expect you will be joining any day now to go take him out. Or are you just going to cheer from your keyboard?

[denbot]

38. I don't cheer, and I don't advocate anything I would not do myself.

I am a veteran with two middle east tours.

[former9thward]

52. I don't know what "two middle east tours" means.

That is not the language a vet would use. But if you are talking about Iraq and Afghanistan both are in worse shape than went th U.S. went in. So your "service" did not do anyone any good except contractors.

[denbot]

204. What it meant was that I was willing to put my own ass on the line.

That was in response to being called a chicken hawk, and a keyboard commando.

Afgainstan was in a world of hurt since the Soviets invaded it. We attacked Iraq to steal it's resources.

I am not advocating conquest, just karma.

[shenmue]

32. I agree

But don't fear, this is DU - people are already wishing you harm.

Remember when people could have different opinions without screaming about it?

[hrmjustin]

33. If we do this is there an endgame?

[denbot]

39. Cripple Assad's ability to harm his own people.

What the future holds probably cannot be predicted or controlled.

[hrmjustin]

41. But by intervening we may do more damage.

[denbot]

56. True, but is that reason enough to do nothing?

A crude anology would be not saving a child because you fear that child would not become a "good" adult.

[hrmjustin]

64. Interesting question but they have been killing people for two years.

What if it goes downhill?

[wild bird]

70. Hell, they've been slaughtering each other in that region for centuries,

and a few cruise missiles ain't going to stop it.

[morningfog]

148. How do you define cripple? How do you define ability? And harm?

Hell, even "his own people?"

And how do you prevent the next one at the top from harming the other side?

[denbot]

158. Cripple; remove his ability to use his military and security assets.

Ability; to be able to order his subordinates, and to receive information from them.
Harm; wholesale slaughter.
His own people; the Syrians.

Remove a dictator, and a top down regime implodes. They are in the middle of a revolution, and afterwards their fate will be their own, what that will be cannot be guessed at. Assad crossed a line that should never be crossed.

My question to you is; would it be better for the majority of Syrians for Assad to regain control of the country?

[morningfog]

222. How do you determine when he can no longer use themilitary and security?

You do realize your definition is regime change?

This could take years to do, with thousands killed by the US. And the aftermath catastrophic.

I think it would be better for the majority of Syrians if we didn't get militarily involved in their civil war. Use the UN weapons inspectors to confirm the use and source of any chemical weapons and dispose of them. The civil war is for the Syrians to have.

[KittyWampus]

35. morality has nothing to do with it, IMO. And I encourage those cheering on aggression to sign up

and join the military.

[denbot]

40. I already did KittyW

How ya doing?

[roamer65]

37. ...and replace him with a Wahhabi-ist Sunni theocracy?

Syrians are screwed whatever way this turns out.

[denbot]

43. I agree, they are likely screwed no matter what.

But at least with Assad gone they have a shot at better leadership.

[cali]

45. no they really don't.

they have a chance at more bloody civil war- at best.

[denbot]

143. If we do nothing, and Assad gains the upper hand, then seals the country..

What happens next will be orders of magnitude more horrific.

[quinnox]

42. You do know there are Al-Qaeda elements in the rebel forces, right?

I wonder if helping terrorist factions like Al-Qaeda take over Syria is a good idea.

[WilliamPitt]

53. You first.

[denbot]

63. Dude I'm 55 with arthritis and all.

Younger men and women have filled in behind me, like I did for my father, grandfather's and tribal ancestors.

[PowerToThePeople]

54. hello chickenhawk.

[denbot]

59. A chicken hawk is someone who advocates war but would never serve in one.

FYI

[PowerToThePeople]

79. You gonna drop into Syria and engage? n/t

[SwampG8r]

244. i always wonder

when people use the term do they mean the bird or are they smooshing two birds with different images into one bird
the bird is really 3 species of southeastern hawks that will snatch a pullet from a barnyard when the doves get thin
we have them here and I watch them drop like a stone from so high you cant see them and poof a dove explodes
awesome birds
no point to the op in this I just wanted to talk birds

[Arcanetrance]

57. I really don't know how I feel about getting involved with syria

Yes engaging in chemical warfare against a civilian population should be grounds for a one way ticket six feet under. But the problem is by all accounts some of the anti government groups have chemical weapons as well and groups such as al qaeda have proven they don't care about the death of civilians if it forwards their cause. This is one big clusterfuck that has no good ending and I think the US staying out may be the best results cause the outcome of involvment could open a can of worms none of us are ready for.

[denbot]

65. The evential out come being worst is the best reason not to intervene.

I just don't think the fear of a possible future is enough.

[mimi85]

80. I feel the same although

seeing those pictures of those little ones laying there row after row, dead with no wounds. I don't want to get involved any more than the next person, but that is just morally repugnant.

[Arcanetrance]

84. I can't look at the pictures it makes me ill to think about like I said theres probably no good

outcome to this regardless of the option chosen

[avebury]

60. Then shouldn't the US companies that provided

Iraq with some of the chemicals they used on the Iranians, the Kurds, and Iraqi civilians also be tried as war criminals in the International Court.

[denbot]

67. Absolutely

Reagan, Casey, Rumsfield, Poppie Bush and the rest who helped him should have been tried as war criminals.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

66. James Bond could take him out in one swipe

[denbot]

69. Do you have him on speed dial?

Batman perhaps?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

71. We have James Bonds

called the CIA

[nadinbrzezinski]

68. When are you enlisting?

Oh I see you are too old to serve and did your time. When are your kin enlisting?

(And after the Sadam had WMDs, oops he did not, one would expect far more skepticism from a vet)

[denbot]

83. Just told my kid what my dad told me..

Get a job, get in college, or join the military or move out of the house. His first classes are next week.

[nadinbrzezinski]

89. We are going to war...at the very least ROTC

We need cannon fodder to lead the cannon fodder

After Syria there is Iran. The adventure is far from over

[dflprincess]

160. But you're apparently not encouraging him to enlist and go to war

Let someone else's kid die for whatever company will be making money off the lastest sideshow you support.

My dad was a combat vet and told my brother he didn't care what he did, just as long as he didn't join the military. Advice my brother passed on to his kids.

[denbot]

188. Yes I encouraged him to join the military.

He's pretty athletic so I suggested the marines instead of the Navy because he is too tall to go running down passage ways and through water tight hatches.

His answer was "No fucking way!", and that was that.

[BainsBane]

72. The problem is it's not so simple

They aren't going to be able to take out Assad and his generals without killing lots of civilians. If we could just punish Assad and co., the decision would be far easier. That, however, is not how war or military strikes of any kind work.

[denbot]

131. Things can be done with minimal loss of non-combatants

Taking out Osama is one example. I did not advocate carpet bombing, just a little selective murder.

[bobduca]

189. "just a little selective murder"

How humane of you!

[denbot]

193. Would you kill ten to save thousands?

This is not black and white, and there are no good choices, just less bad ones.

[bobduca]

194. Hobsons Choice

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobson's_choice

[denbot]

198. bobduca, to use your analogy, which would the devil choose?

By the way I follow indigenous spiritual practices, and only think of the devil in terms of allegory.

Would he leave Assad to his work?

[avebury]

76. Who on Earth decided that the US is the arbitor of morality on this planet?

We have done more then our fair share of harm around world. If Truman had responded favorably to Ho Chi Minh's request for assistance in making Viet Nam independent instead of supporting the French Imperialism, the Viet Nam war might never have happened.

We have directly or indirectly overthrown way too many governments that were either not of our choosing (like we should have a say in how another country is run - ) or because a duly elected leadership was perceived to be a threat to Western corporations or countries imperialism. The second gulf war under Bush Jr. was absolutely unwarranted. Going to war to show the world that you can finish the job your Dad started is not a good reason. Thousands and thousands of innocent civilians lost their lives in the second gulf war.

Generally speaking, we only interfere when it is the best interest of the MIC or people in high places want to distract us from what is going on internally within the US. I look upon the drumming for going after Syria as bait and switch. The actions of the US tend to be way to short sighted with no thought to a long term plan. While they try to stir us up to move against Syria, the conservative nuts in Washington DC and states across this nation will continue to try to steam roll all kinds of legislation to continue to destroy women's reproductive rights, voting rights, and whatever rights they can think of destroying. Bait and Switch. Bait and Switch.

[denbot]

145. I will agree with you there.

I still think it to be a greater evil to stand by and do nothing.

[avebury]

221. The greater evil ultimatley might occur

by not taking care of business within the US first. Due to 9-11, the Patriot Act and Homeland Security, way too many police forces within the US are being militarized by the MIC and our own government. And talk about an out of control police forces. Not a week goes by when you don't hear about some cops someplace abusing their authority to the harm of civilians. And the good cops don't do anything about it.

If the people wait too long to try to resolve our own problems it will be too late to change anything. There is a potential that, if we don't become like pre-WWII/WWII Germany we might find ourselves in the same predicament that the civilians of Syria (and other countries were civilians are victimized by their own government) are in. Do you really think that the 1%ers, Corporate Overlords, and the MIC are going to allow the masses to take back control over our country, thus threatening their control and wealth?

[Vinnie From Indy]

77. The OP is being soundly rejected by DU'ers

Almost 1000 views and only 3 recs.

"Whether or not we should be the world's policeman is a moot point, as we have amassed so much military might, that role is also part of the cost of our hunger for force dominance."

Says who?

[n2doc]

88. So Morality requires us to kill

Worked out so well in Iraq, didn't it? Worked out so well in Libya.

You were in Desert Storm- so you must have disagreed with GHW Bush's order to not take Saddam out. And I would guess you loved it when W started trying to kill Saddam with "Shock and Awe"?

Again, who made us GOD? Syria poses no threat to us. Who are you to decide who lives and who dies? And how did you suddenly become omnipotent, so that you know exactly what happened and who is responsible for each act?

[denbot]

190. It is very likely that Assad was behind the attack.

I do remember the bullshit behind the incubator crap for Poppie's Gulf1. I also trust Kerry, and this President to make an informed decision based on fact, not smoke and mirror justification for a premeditated war.

If you knew for certain that Assad was responsible would that change anything? Do you think that Assad and his generals are blameless?

Is there any atrocity that would sway you to intervene? Since the Syrian military is no threat to us, does that diminish those people's deaths?

[jessie04]

90. I could not agree more.

[rurallib]

92. sign up and go do it if you want

but before the country gets involved I hope we ask a lot of questions that we seldom seem to ask when we go off half-cocked.

[denbot]

211. I absolutely agree with you

And if those fucking assholes in the previous administration had not fucked us, and the Iraqis over, this would be a little easier to argue.

[David__77]

93. This is apology for terrorism. Implicit support for al Qaeda.

...

[denbot]

215. Umm.. OK..

Huh?

[IMG][/IMG]

[David__77]

217. I suggest you study the situation.

...

[Coyotl]

94. How would you like it if they said the same about your country's leaders?

Which is likely if they start yet another war. Those who start wars don't get to decide when they end (even if they are still alive).

[Octafish]

95. That's exactly what the two George Bushes said about Saddam.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/duforum/DCForumID66/10496.html

Poppy was a bit more sophisticated, having a cache as a wimp and all:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3853409&mesg_id=3887528

Sorry to sound so harsh, denbot. But war should be the last option, unless one's gonna make a buck off it.

"Money trumps peace." -- pretzeldent George W Bush, Feb. 14, 2007

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1839283&mesg_id=1839378

[Glassunion]

97. Take him and his generals out? Hell yeah!

The tens of thousands of civilians that always accompany taking generals out... Hell no!

Tell me how to do the former while avoiding the latter, then you may have a deal.

[actslikeacarrot]

98. And then? What do we do when the smoke clears? n/t

[bowens43]

99. Rarely have I seen so much bullshit in such a short post.....

it is our moral duty NOT TO ATTACK ANYONE!!!!!!!!

unfucking believable that anyone can feel as you do.

[denbot]

187. And how is turning our backs to slaughter moral?

How is doing nothing to prevent a greater tragedy not a greater wrong?

[Arctic Dave]

102. Self delete.

Last edited Fri Aug 30, 2013, 10:05 AM - Edit history (1)

My apologies for the insults Denbot. That was over the top.

[denbot]

182. Wow AD, that's the first shitty thing you've ever said to me in all these years..

Why would we do nothing?

[scheming daemons]

236. Drive by? He's responded dozens of times in thread.

[Arctic Dave]

241. Denbot, my apologies for the insults. It was uncalled for.

I self deleted the post.

[denbot]

252. No worries AD, My post was written to incite debate on a very touchy subject for DU

I understand your initial responce, and the emotional force behind it.
Peace (all irony aside).

[Arctic Dave]

254. Thank you for your understanding.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

104. Testeronios for breakfast?

[Agnosticsherbet]

106. The Assad Regeim is not targeted for change. It is a strike against the Syrian military...

equipment and personnel. I'll bet Palin can see the smoke from the chimneys of Russian Weapons manufacturers from her back yard.

[dairydog91]

114. Wait, shouldn't we take him and his generals out first, then fuck Assad?

[denbot]

200. Thread win!

Please collect your gift at the door.

[L0oniX]

115. You have no fucking business telling me what is my moral duty is. n/t

[denbot]

213. Perhaps you are internalizing my post.

I was speaking as a collective morality, and not trying to dictate your personal beliefs.

Peace ( and yes I see the irony )

[Hippo_Tron]

119. I don't see any rational justification based on your argument

You've presented no evidence that intervening in Syria is going to save lives, end this conflict sooner, or end it with a more positive outcome.

The only justification I've seen from you or anyone else is that we have to draw a line at chemical weapons to send a message to others who might consider using them. I think that argument is highly dubious. Our decisions about whether or not to respond to human rights abuses don't have that kind of consistency. They vary considerably based on who is in power, what other problems we're facing, public opinion at the time, and the other costs and benefits of intervention.

I can almost guarantee you that if Saudi Arabia faces the same kind of uprising that's going on in Syria, they're going to use any means necessary to stay in power. And not only will we not stop them, we may well send troops to help them.

[denbot]

196. If we play wack-a-mole with every despot who ACTUALLY uses chems, that is a deterrent.

I knew from the gate that Saddam had nothing to do with 911, because the most important thing to any despot is to remain in power. There are lines a state ( and yes, even the House of Saud) leader should not cross.

[Bonobo]

120. Maybe it's just me, but I would tend to view the opinion of a vet with suspicion.

A certain amount of indoctrination has gone on with vets, starting with the assumption of the GREAT NEED for military intervention.

So forgive me for not taking advice about military intervention from one.

[wild bird]

137. Most COMBAT VETS would not agree with his position.

I know this combat vet is vehemently against any military action against Syria.

[Bonobo]

141. I'm glad to hear that. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

163. Count two more round these parts

[IDemo]

121. we excel at warfare?

If you mean we have the power to wreak holy hell with munitions, yes, we excel. If you mean we have the power, ability and political will to engage militarily and produce desirable results, than no, we have demonstrated with countless loss of innocent lives and destruction of nations that we excel at nothing whatsoever but creating new enemies and costing trillions to the US in doing so.

[denbot]

183. Very good point.

Our last venture in Iraq was a naked attempt to seize that country's resources. We also stopped a genocide in Bosnia. Military power is like fire, it's all about the how and why you use it.

In this case I believe it is morally wrong to turn our backs on this.

[taught_me_patience]

124. Although I disagree with you, you make some points

I also respect your service... you are no chickenhawk as some in this thread has accused you of.

[markpkessinger]

127. Why haven't you called for an invasion of Egypt . . .

. . . where the military junta has slaughtered hundreds of its own citizens in the past several weeks? These were citizens who, I might add, were in the streets demanding the restoration of the government THEY elected.

[denbot]

185. The kids, the gas..

Mubarak's gone, and they are still sorting things out. If military starts gassing sections of Cairo..
I think that people in a popular uprising should at the least get some consideration from us.

[markpkessinger]

192. Oh, I forgot -- death by gas is so much worse than death by military assault. . .

. . . and so much worse, too, than being in the wrong place when a drone hits. Silly me.

[denbot]

202. Death is the same end regardless of the means.

It is both possible, and in my opinion desirable to take out the leadership responsible for using gas.

I think fewer civilians will die this way.

[steve2470]

128. Not in favor of sending anyone's kids to Syria, not even to bomb/shell

Not open to debate with me. Non-negotiable.

[Vashta Nerada]

130. The western half of our country is burning and you're calling for war?

[MatthewStLouis]

133. Hmmm. Seeing lot's of closed minds on this issue. Everything is black and white now.

I'm sorry but we have a democratic president, Assad has crossed a line and now we might have to do something. Peace is so damned easy when it's not your family being killed off by a dictator.

I believe in Peace. I believe in people's right to govern themselves. I also believe sometimes you have to stand up to the schoolyard bully. Especially, if you're the biggest kid on the playground.

*That said, let me say, I always felt the Iraq war was a sham. And... these things are never pretty, but it's part of belonging to a world of nations and until nations are dissolved, this kind of thing will keep happening.

[Iggo]

165. How many civilians are you willing to kill to punish Assad for killing civilians?

[MatthewStLouis]

173. Don't assume everyone who is willing to think and talk about this thing is a warmonger.

Maybe if we had done something for the rebels sooner, things might not have escalated so far. Who knows...

This thing is not pretty, but how many more kids need to be gassed? When you're the biggest kid on the playground, you have an obligation to do something.

Peace is so easy, when it's not your family being killed by a dictator.

[Iggo]

175. I didn't.

How many?

[denbot]

208. The other side of the coin is how many should Assad kill before we act.

How many?

If the question was asked of me, how many civilians should die to decapitate this regime, my answer would be none if possible, the fewest possible at best.

If doing so would not save lives on a net basis then I would not advocate doing anything.

[Iggo]

223. We decapitated the Iraqi regime.

Anywhere from 100k to 500k dead Iraqis. Was it worth it? Is Iraq better off? Are we better off? What did we accomplish there other than satisfying PNAC's war boner? Are the civilians safer now than before we got there. Did we save lives on a net basis?

If we jump into the middle of a civil war where both sides are our enemies, are we going to have better answers to the above questions than the last time we decided to go exploding things in that region?

[Dash87]

207. You mean Al Qaeda, right?

How many kids did fundamentalist psychos in Syria kill? Probably just as many. When there's two sides to choose, and they're both murdering families by the thousands, staying out of it is the only option.

[4Q2u2]

230. You do know?

You do know that Al Qeada makes up part of the rebel force and is trying to help install the Caliphate and a Theocracy.



http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/356920/kucinich-striking-syria-will-make-us-military-al-qaedas-air-force-sterling-beard

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/28/how-u-s-strikes-on-syria-help-al-qaeda.html

http://abcnews.go.com/International/hezbollah-al-qaeda-fighters-edging-closer-confrontation/story?id=19144119

[Pretzel_Warrior]

140. I agree wheheartedly

Sorry you are getting blasted despite your years of military experience.

[morningfog]

150. His military experience has fuck to do with advocating for an unnecessary and

counter productive act of war.

The US is about to take on a new front of killing people. We still aren't even out of Afghanistan, 12 years later. We just cannot stand to not be killing a new group of people.

[bobduca]

157. See there's that 'Veterans get out of argument free card' n/t

[cry baby]

142. I agree as long as we don't "take out" civilians. We must stand up for humanitarian rights.

It's not a popular opinion here. But I believe we must always stand up for human rights. We haven't done enough of that in years.

War, no...but punishment for killing children with chemical weapons, yes.

Isolationists that can ignore human suffering are not left-leaning, but are more in line with tea partners, IMHO...and I'm entitled to it.

Remember Rwanda. Fuck us for not doing something to help those poor people.

[morningfog]

146. At least you own it. Killing more will not solve this problem.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

153. Ummmmmmmmm

this is what people said about Saddam. Are you advocating an invasion of Syria? Why does it have to be the US to take this action? Our moral duty? Wow...........

[penultimate]

168. I don't think anyone is advocating that Syria be invaded

They're just looking to lob a few missiles at some targets. I personally don't think we should and I think it would be counter productive. However, I find it silly for everyone to talk about the invasion of Syria or the tens of thousands of civilians who will die as a result of any NATO strikes. People will die, some of them will probably be civilians, but it won't be mass death. I'm not convinced that NATO action will save any lives though, but will rather just add to the total deaths.

[Puzzledtraveller]

162. Oh damn, Bush!!!!

LOL

[dflprincess]

164. No money for SNAP, no money for education, healthcare, infrastructure - always money for war

What's our moral duty to our own country?

[MotherPetrie]

177. And then what?

[MrMickeysMom]

180. {{{{ crickets }}}}

... that's what...

[denbot]

209. This is going to play out to unknown ends no matter what.

If the Assad regime is responsible for using chemical weapons against civilians, then they should forfeit their power. Since it is a safe bet they won't do it voluntarily, force should be used.

[MotherPetrie]

210. And then what?

[denbot]

212. That is for the fates

I don't mean that as a cop-out, it's just that once events like this start rolling, all bets are off.

I still think taking out the Syrian leadership is the moral thing to do.

[MotherPetrie]

216. IOW, you have no answer. Just attack Assad and let the chips fall where they may

is good enough for you. The law of unintended consequences be damned.

[denbot]

220. Do you really think leaving Assad in place would better for the Syrian people?

Do you really think letting acts like that slide would lead to a better future? If so why?

[MotherPetrie]

227. The only thing I know is that I'm not willing to take a chance on ANOTHER endless,

Unwinnable war.

[Flying Squirrel]

184. Ignored says what?

[bobduca]

197. Welcome to DU

warmonger

[Taverner]

201. And anyone who is bombed with him? Take them out?

[denbot]

218. Again, I'll state my premise, would it be better to kill 10 to save 1,000's?

We are at a place where doing nothing is worst then taking precise, limited action.

[Dash87]

205. To save the Syrians, we must murder them all with bombs?

That makes no sense.

[Marrah_G]

228. Are you joining up?

[scheming daemons]

237. He did.

[JoeyT]

231. I don't support intervention, but it's not due to opposition to

intervening on general principles: It's for multiple reasons.

#1a: We just got rid of a president that's a war criminal. We not only refuse to do anything about it, we actively shield him from any repercussion. His bullshit killed several orders of magnitude more than Assad's. So we don't have the moral high ground. That's not even counting the kidnappings and torture. It's our moral duty to prosecute our own war criminals, but we not only shirk it, we fight it with all our might. To the point of insisting that nothing we do could possibly be a war crime.

#1b: Also removing several points of grade from our moral high ground is our outright refusal to sign treaties that ban weapons the rest of the world considers just as bad as chemical weapons. Cluster bombs and mines, for example.

#2: We don't actually know who used chemical weapons. The only "evidence" we have is "Our super secret spy agency was told by someone else's super secret spy agency that they overheard a super secret phone conversation that proves Assad done it." I'm inherently suspicious of anyone that insists we totally trust that they know things we don't. That line didn't fly for me during Bush (Primarily because everyone knew he didn't know shit.), and it won't really work now.

#3: Making chemical weapons some magic Line That Shall Not Be Crossed implies that as long as you use bullets, knives, or explosives, you can kill as many people as you like and it's totally cool. Actually, given our refusal to intervene when bullets, knives(machetes), or explosives were being used to massacre people, it does a lot more than imply. There are very few good ways to die, and if someone that hates you is choosing your method, none of the ones they're going to pick are likely to be any better than any of the others.

We should probably be scaling back on some of that force dominance since we can't afford to provide food, healthcare, education, infrastructure, housing, or pretty much anything else to our most vulnerable citizens. Being the best in the world at projecting force is about as useful to most of our population as having a president that can light his own farts. Probably less so, since beans are relatively cheap.

If projecting force into this region costs the same amount as it would have cost to provide heating oil to 400 elderly people that otherwise might freeze to death, was projecting force really the moral thing to do?

[GeorgeGist]

232. Evidence would be nice...

But obviously not necessary if you believe in terrorism as a tactic.

[99Forever]

234. Keyboard Commandos are so cute.

Ya got it all figgered out, doncha?

[scheming daemons]

238. He served.

[99Forever]

239. So fucking what?

If this tough guy wants to jump into another stupid fucking war, there's fucking planes leaving every fucking day. You are welcome to go with him.

[backscatter712]

245. I think I've seen this movie before. I don't want to see the sequel.

"Fuck Saddam, take him and his generals out!"

Why didn't you know, they'll greet us as liberators! Syria will be just like Iraq after we liberated it! All sunshine and democracy!

Yep! It's our moral duty to stop the killing by killing a bunch of people! Makes sense to me!

[alarimer]

248. There's a whole long list of murderous dictators out there. Where do we stop?

And why is it our job to decide?

I realize we've taken it upon ourselves to be judge, jury and executioner in any number of cases. Doesn't make it right.

[oberliner]

253. Who are the worst ones on the list?

And what, if anything, do you think should be done to stop them?

[WovenGems]

251. Nope

Assad may have or not done that. The Sunni would do that to their own people to get us to win the war for them. Best we can do is sit this one out as their are no good guys in the fight.