So I asked my friends from Syria about my "I support intervention" stance.

[IdaBriggs]

At least one person I usually respect has a different opinion, and while the nitwits insisting I am a pro-Bush pro-Iraq war monger who hates the troops and supports murder while living in a Hollywood fantasy land because I am an al-Quaida cheerleader who doesn't know how to use criticsl thinking skills and hates 'Murika (you get the idea ) are being over the top in their outrage, realistically it is a message board, and sometimes a good old fashioned flame war happens with controversial topics.

Anyway, the thread has generated hundreds of replies, and most of them are derogatory and disagree with my stance. Since most of the opinions are repetitive (see why I hate 'Murika as defined above ) I thought I would share this post where people might actually be able to read it.

To be fair, I am a pretty busy person, and most of my opinions have been formed through my horror of children being killed and my social network; I get most of my news from DU, but my "Middle East" policy thoughts are heavily influenced by my social circle which includes a guy who served in the Israeli military with advanced degrees in the history and politics of the region, dear friends who visit family in Egypt (siblings have participated in the street demonstrations there), my Iraqi refugee neighbors, and the family who provide child care for my children who are from Syria, among others.

If you are confused by all of this, I live in southeastern Michigan, which has one of the largest populations of Muslims in the country, and my children went to a Muslim preschool. (No, we are not Muslim.)

So I want Assad gone. As I said, I was pretty surprised by the venom my post received, so I decided to double check on the propriety of my stance when I picked up my kids after work.

I asked the (Syrian) family who run the place if I was wrong. They started laughing. No, they told me. The US needs to intervene. They hold no hope that Assad will be removed - they are more realistic than I am. But Ahmad's brother lives in Damascus, and he described in emotional terms how his brother was awakened in the middle of the night, went out on his balcony on the fourth floor, and watched the missiles fly over head that carried the chemical weapons that landed 7 km/5 miles (he used both measures so I could understand how close his brother was) that killed the children. He said that it isn't 1,300 dead from the attack - it is between 5,000 and 6,000.

I asked them (one of his daughters was in the room) if they were afraid of someone worse taking over.

They started laughing. "What worse can someone do?" they asked me. And then they tried to explain just how completely messed up things are there.

They support intervention. I am their friend, and I support it, too.

To some folks here on DU, that makes me an Evil Person. I am sorry you feel that way. I like to think it isn't true, but everyone is entitled to their opinion.

What I want will probably not happen the way I want it. I accept that. I still support intervention and I pray that Obama and his leadership team will make good decisions for the benefit of the Syrian people.

They say we are all within dix degrees of seperation of each other. My children spend all day with a woman (Ahmad's youngest daughter) whose uncle watched missiles fly overhead the other night that killed children I have never met. I refused to look at the Facebook pictures of the horror posted by their family members who took them. I was brought to tears by his story of his five year grand-niece whose friends are dead, who is still trying to grapple with the fact she isn't.

These are not things I want anyone to have to deal with, and I want Assad out of power. I would like the people who committed such atrocities held accountable.

And I don't want other people to live through such horror filled nights as the brother of the man I trust to watch over my children.

Flame away, DU. I stand by my position.

Because while some folk really think it is all about being an ignorant al-Quaida loving war mongering moron, for me it is about "not letting tyrants slaughter people."

[cali]

2. dig deeper.

instead of asking friends in Syria you could have done some research.

Nothing planned will get rid of Assad. The administration has no plans to do that.

You cling to your ignorance. It's a shame.

Fortunately, it appears that what the Obama administration is planning is so limited that it may not set off what so many experts are worried about- a wider regional conflagration and even more genocide and ethnic cleansing, but who knows, it's still a risk.

[Whisp]

12. that was uncalled for.

pay attention to your own cling to's before you going accusing others of ignorance.

I'm not sure if I agree with the OP but I feel it was earnest and heartfelt and doesn't deserve Snark Right Out of The Gate.

feh.

[lumpy]

14. She must be the queen of Snark.

thanks for posting

[avaistheone1]

30. I think cali is simply stating the OP is ill informed at best.

I agree the OP's position seems to be formulated about what her Israeli and Syrian friends think.

I don't believe there was much critical thought in the OP position. I would hate to start a war started with Syria based on her friends views.

jmo

[HangOnKids]

42. Bam

You got it. I just read a post here on DU that suggests there are outside forces pushing this agenda. Interesting.

[HangOnKids]

41. Your 6 hidden posts suggest other wise.

Uncalled for appears to be your forte.

[jtuck004]

48. Just because someone burns your books doesn't make one wrong. n/t

[HangOnKids]

49. What ever

terrible analogy BTW. Thanks for playing!

[jtuck004]

70. ^^this post^^ underscores the point the other person was making

So I am guessing the analogy was closer than one might like...

[HangOnKids]

73. Word salad

Thanks for chiming in

[jtuck004]

75. Food for your strawman. n/t

[HangOnKids]

76. Sorry not playing

C' Ya!

[jtuck004]

80. Don't bet on it. LOL.

[Bobbie Jo]

85. Speaking of fortes....

Dont you have some spel'ing errrors to correct somewhere?

[Hekate]

71. Apparently the administration is consulting with you...

... and a large committee of other DUers who are certain they know what Obama has in mind.

Just sayin'

[JI7]

3. i know some syrians but they are of armenian/christian background

and they mostly support Assad. but it has more to do with what could happen. like how the muslim brotherhood ended up taking control in egypt.

it's a difficult issue. but there have been many people of syrian background who have been protesting trying to get Obama to take action for some time now.

[Yo_Mama]

4. Thank you for posting this

I don't actually doubt the attack. I doubt the purpose of the attack. I cannot see how it could benefit Assad in any way, so I suspect that it was a rebel clade within the regime that did this in order to provoke external action.

It's clearly a dire situation, regardless of how one looks at it. I also fear that if we attack we will do far more harm than good, and I would prefer to see the entire debate occur at the UN, so that everything that can be known is brought out on the international stage.

The brutality of the Assad regime is well known.

[quinnox]

5. damn, so now you posted two OPs cheerleading this potential invasion

No offense, but I have an ignore slot open. I really don't sign on to DU to see cheer-leading for this, I would go to free republic to see that kind of sentiment. And you should expect all that you have been given, and more, in terms of blow-back, because Du is 90% and more against this, as shown by polls here.


I have even seen hard core BOG types say they are against it, and that is something else.

[elehhhhna]

28. anecdotal is not anecdata

interesting story but yeah - sounds like an agenda and some bullshit, too

[HangOnKids]

45. Big Agenda Rolling Around

the story was not interesting to me, sounded like hooey.

[G_j]

38. missed the other thread

but at least the person is explaining their position. They seem sincere enough, but what do I know? As a peace activist I try to remember to look for bridges. If a person is willing to talk, maybe they can listen too.
With a tip of the hat to MLK today.

[quinnox]

44. Yea. I'm not trying to be mean to the OP or anything, but war is serious shit, and it makes me

respond sharply I guess when I see two OPs basically cheering it on.

[G_j]

78. I hear you

I have a sickening feeling as the drums beat on. Obama needs to listen to a different drum himself, but I doubt he has the capacity anymore. On this day especially, when speaking tribute to King.
I'm afraid Obama isn't strong enough to say no.

[CJCRANE]

6. What good has our intervention achieved recently?

I just don't see an example or a scenario where intervention has achieved the stated objectives.

And I don't succumb to the "appeal to emotion" technique anymore. Emotional manipulation has been used by both sides as a very blunt propaganda tool.

[bhikkhu]

13. The limited air support in Libya worked out well

though its not like its all roses and tea parties after a 42-year dictatorship is finally overthrown. There are certainly problems, but it did end the war there quickly and initiate a (hopeful) period of stability and self-determination.

[Scootaloo]

27. Libya also didn't have a seven-way civil war going on

[bhikkhu]

52. I wouldn't argue with that

...two years ago maybe the outcomes could have been better, or at least somewhat predictable. I don't know if good intentions will make any difference this time.

[Scootaloo]

58. If we were going to intervene, it should hav been then.

Of course, here's the problem... US policy opposed the Arab Spring. We backed the guys in Libya because they were doing what we wanted to happen anyway. We didn't give support to anyone else (and in fact turned on the people of Bahrain and Jordan when they demanded democracy) because we were perfectly comfortable with crusty dictators. The stance was, better the Assad we know than the popular movement we don't.

So why now? well, because at this point it's pretty certain that there will not be any sort of popular rule in Syria once all is done. Either the crusty dictator remains in power, or Syria just turns into a giant sucking hole. Either way, no great change to the acceptable order in the Middle East, as US policy figures it.

[IdaBriggs]

60. I started hearing about Syria around then (2 years or so).

Women crying in the parking lot at preschool drop-off. (Shudder) Families glaring daggers at each other, and whispered conversations about who was being affected.

Ignoring it seems to have emboldened the wrong people.

Sigh.

[elleng]

7. Thanks.

Up close and personal helps.

[Vinnie From Indy]

8. The banality of evil.

"Arendt's first reaction to Eichmann, "the man in the glass booth," was — nicht einmal unheimlich — not even sinister." (4) She argues that "The deeds were monstrous, but the doer ... was quite ordinary, commonplace, and neither demonic nor monstrous." (5) Arendt's perception that Eichmann seemed to be a common man, evidenced in his transparent superficiality and mediocrity left her astonished in measuring the unaccounted evil committed by him, that is, organizing the deportation of millions of Jews to the concentration camps. Actually, what Arendt had detected in Eichmann was not even stupidity, in her words, he portrayed something entirely negative, it was thoughtlessness. Eichmann's ordinariness implied in an incapacity for independent critical thought: "... the only specific characteristic one could detect in his past as well as in his behavior during the trial and the preceding police examination was something entirely negative: it was not stupidity but a curious, quite authentic inability to think." (6) (emphasis added) Eichmann became the protagonist of a kind of experience apparently so quotidian, the absence of the critical thought. Arendt says: "When confronted with situations for which such routine procedures did not exist, he [Eichmann] was helpless, and his cliché-ridden language produced on the stand, as it had evidently done in his official life, a kind of macabre comedy. Clichés, stock phrases, adherence to conventional, standardized codes of expression and conduct have the socially recognized function of protecting us against reality, that is, against the claim on our thinking attention that all events and facts make by virtue of their existence."

http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Cont/ContAssy.html

*********************************************************

What makes your statements in regard to removing Assad from power so abhorrent to me is the thoughtlessness with which you deliver them. You have yet to offer any comments on the real people that will die or be horribly maimed by the actions you advocate. This is even more true in light of your repeated comments that you feel no obligation to offer any sacrifice other than the money you pay in taxes. To me that is evil and grotesque. I will not, as some will undoubtedly do, offer that your OP is conscientious or reflective. It is neither in my mind.

[elehhhhna]

31. Right? I don't hear any Syrians in SYRIA saying "bomb my country"

hmmmmm.



Next up: Miami Cubans on why we should bomb Cuba?

[bluestate10]

9. I don't think that you are an evil person or a war monger. War and peace is a deeply personal

issue. I want the USA to stay out of Syria, if Britain and France want to launch missiles those nations can. If we take action against Syria, why not take action against the many dictators that are killing their people? If we bomb Syria, why not Darfur? Why not bomb Iran? People get killed in modern Iran and never get heard from, they are the invisible dead as are people in other parts of the world where dictators kill with impunity. My heart breaks when a leader choses to kill his or her people instead of lift them upward, but it is not the responsibility of the USA to solve the ills that a cold heart creates.

[Bluenorthwest]

10. That's some characterization of your thread, considering you did not even respond to my

post which pointed out some facts about the World Court that your OP made clear you did not understand. The impression I got from your thread was that facts and discussion were not at all your goal. I do not find much good in making a case for war which includes factually incorrect points. The case for war, if it is to be made, requires full attention to detail and no moments of fantasia.
And of course Ida, this being a civil war in Syria, you can find Syrians who will both support and oppose intervention, Assad, the US, whatever. They are having a civil war, clearly that nation is divided in opinion rather fiercely on many issues.
But when a person can not speak with you about actual facts about actual law and such and get a response, this rant of yours is really pretty petulant. You posted your other OP in order to get the responses you now whine about. It is divisive and an exploitation of serious business as your own personal plaything.

[IdaBriggs]

21. My apologies, but by the time your very thoughtful post was made,

The entire thread was a pure flame fest.

Your post definitely helped me to realize my knee jerk "to The Hague with them" was not realistic, and you are one of the people who influenced my further inquiry to my (much more aware of the reality of the situation) friends.

Assad is not the the first murdering scum-lord tyrant, and sadly, he won't be the last.

I still want him ousted, and I would love some better solutions.

As foolish as many people might find it, I am trusting that the administration will do their best with this problem.

I find it frustrating that we have no system in place to deal with these types of scum (including the previous US regime).

[REP]

11. Cubans in Florida want us to oust Castro.

It is easy to find expats willing to have others spill blood for them.

Will you spill yours for your friends, or do you expect the children of others to do it?

[magical thyme]

20. she has already stated she expects others to spill their red blood to oust Assad

Neither she nor her children will be sullied with the dirty business of war. She abhors killing, so she expects to pay other people to do it for her. She also has yet to respond to the question of who will take over once Assad is gone.

This OP strikes me as another self-serving, manipulative post. "Just think of the children." Nobody accused her of "hating 'murka" in her other OP. What responders were emphatic about was that getting rid of Assad would leave equally, if not more, viscious thugs in charge. And that she needs to be careful what she wishes for.

So now it turns out that all of her connections to, and intel on, Syria, which is what she has based her opinion on, consist of a single ex-patriot family and some pepole from other ME countries.

She states above that nothing could be worse than what Assad is currently doing. Well, her friends don't seem to want more of the same, which is what they would get under a different thug.

And a lot of things could be worse than sarin gas. How about the white phosphorus we dropped in Iraq? Or the Agent Orange and Napalm in Vietnam?

She says she's concerned about "the children." Well, what about the thousands of Iraqi children with birth defects as a direct result of our dropping uranium in Iraq?

We killed 100,000 Iraqis at a minimum, and as many as a million, getting rid of Hussein, and left a bloody mess and destroyed infrastructure behind.

How many Afghanis did we kill trying to get rid of the Taliban?

I'm not wasting any more time on this. Onto Ignore she goes.

[IdaBriggs]

22. Yeah! :)

Where is the "happy dance" icon?

[TBF]

15. There are tyrants worldwide - why this country?

Are you going to charter the IdaBriggs Drone Mobile and circle the globe taking them out one by one?

Why this country? Why now? Who is going to profit from this?

[IdaBriggs]

65. I think the chemical weapons this week did it for me.

Ahmad was very specific that it was "just the other night." I believe it also happened earlier this year, but this was near Damascus, and that is a whole other ball of crazy....

(I had seen your reply earlier, and apologize for not responding sooner; I don't think this is an oil situation, but in fairness, I understand the "follow the money" thoughts.)

[TBF]

86. I'm torn - I think the chemical weapons thing happened but I'm not sure who is behind it

and why.

The best 2 theories I've seen are that it has to do with piping the natural gas out of Iran or possibly that it's some sort of bait to get the US involved.

In one sense it's always the money in that region because 75% of the natural resources most countries are interested in (at least currently) are in that region - so the focus is always there. But there is a lot of theater that goes on around it as well.

If I were Obama I would tread VERY carefully here.

But as someone with friends (a connection to the area) I can definitely see your point of view as well.

[riqster]

16. Thanks for a thoughtful post.

I'm not in agreement, but I appreciate how you took the time to explain where your opinion comes from.

[Marrah_G]

17. I hope your friends are not killed by the missles

I hope there in no ground war because I would prefer my brother and son not have to get involved in another tribal religious dispute. Things Rarely get better when we intervene and in recent history things only get worse with Religious zealots taking over afterwards.

We are NOT the police of the world. Someone else should deal with them, not us. Eventually all the killing we have done in the middle east will come back to haunt us.

[KoKo]

18. Ida...what's happened to you?

Maybe I have you confused with some other DU Poster from "WAY BACK"...but weren't you engaging Ralph Nader to do Ohio Recount? I donated to that due to your recommendation.

And, didn't you have Twins ...somewhere after that.

I might be confusing you with an Activist leftist Dem... So, if I got that wrong...I apologize...but, your post supporting War with Syria...kind of seemed...a different Ida from the DU'er I remember..

I must be confusing you with someone else.

[IdaBriggs]

23. KoKo, it is still me.

I don't want war with Syria - I want an evil murdering bastard removed from a position that lets him commit atrocities against his own people.

I think clever people with a clear view of the issue can find a way to make that happen.

I am ever the optimist.

[KoKo]

26. Okay...thanks...I though it was you. And thanks for your reply...

Don't agree with you on this...but, it's okay. We can agree to disagree on this one.

[oldhippie]

35. I think you want a TV show, or a movie .....

... where the spec ops team goes in and does what you want nice and cleanly, with no one getting killed, and truth, justice, and the American Way all get served in an hour or two, popcorn included. And everyone lives happily ever after. That's the mind of a 12 year old. Both your OPs remind me of "Mommy, make the bad man go away!"

We, unfortunately, live in the real world. It's not a movie. Lots of people get hurt and killed in horrible ways. Wanting, wishing and hoping for unrealistic things is immature and not helpful in the real world.

Sorry, your heart is in the right place, but all your emotion won't move even one real body.

[IdaBriggs]

50. Your first paragraph would be the ideal solution (minus the insults, of course).

You are right in that these are real people Who Are Dying.

I hope and pray that he is stopped.

I repeat my support for us stopping him.

[Marrah_G]

91. Our missles will kill alot of innocent Syrians

[7962]

46. They say "who could be worse?" Trust me, there are worse people to have in charge

I wont accuse you of anything but having an opinion. Mine sounds mean spirited to many, I'm sure. Most people over there dont like us and would forget we ever helped them anyway. Make the fight an even one and let THEM sort it out for the next 10 yrs. And take a bunch of Iranian Quds with them.

[alcibiades_mystery]

19. I oppose intervention, but any suggestion that there are rash decisions being made is just foolish

The decisions may certainly be mistaken (I think it is a massive mistake), but they are certainly well-considered and careful. To say otherwise is pure ignorant nonsense, and ignores 2 years of deliberation on the question of Syria. Real people are being massacred.

This is to set aside the absolute stupidity of people who think the whole thing has been cooked up to "distract from the NSA scandal." There's no reaching people that stupid.

[davidpdx]

66. I agree with you

The whole CT thing seems to have run amok on DU.

[IdaBriggs]

88. You have been making some very good posts on this subject.

I appreciate the care and thought you have been putting into them.

[bvar22]

24. I took some time and read through your post.

I came to this in the 5th Paragraph:

"So I want Assad gone."

And you believe that the USA should start "intervening" because YOU "want Assad gone," or have a friend in Syria who wants Assad gone?

I'm sure there are a lot of Muslims in Syria who want to keep Assad exactly where he is.

Have you given any thought about WHO and WHAT will replace Assad
once the USA takes him out" for you?
or what cost or Blow Back the USA will incur because of this strategy?
SEE: Vietnam
SEE: Iraq
SEE: Libya
SEE: Afghanistan

Can you give us a realistic vision of Syria AFTER we take out Assad?
If someone can do THAT (a believable vision of Iraq AFTER we do the killing),
I will listen.

[Cha]

25. Mahalo IdaBriggs~ You state your case well.

How can one not have compassion for those who are suffering an unbearable tragedy under Assad's brutality?

Yours is a very unique perspective and I can see why you would have a different viewpoint than all those who attacked you for daring to have a different opinion.

I appreciate hearing how your Syrian friends feel about some kind of intervention from the US and her allies.

May the wisest choice be made for the best possible outcome for the people in Syria.

[Cha]

29. P.S. what would your Syrian friends say to those who

are pushing.. "how do they know it's assad who's using chemical gas on Syrians?"?

[IdaBriggs]

53. I believe the extensive evidence by pretty much everybody

makes it a non-issue for them. They "know" it is him.

And thank you for your kindness.

[Cha]

54. Just as I thought.. Thank you for replying, Ida.

[David__77]

32. So, my friends from Syria support the government and oppose the terrorists? So what?

Everyone's got an opinion.

[IdaBriggs]

39. Different opinions? On a message board? And they (gasp) SHARE THEM?

Don't you know this is supposed to be an echo chamber with the meme of the day being repeated?

[David__77]

40. No, I praise that there are different opinions expressed.

I just don't find it especially compelling, "some Syrian say this" or other such anecdotes.

[IdaBriggs]

43. I understand. For me, it is the eternal truth

that all politics are local, and the sources of our information/the trust we have in their validity and insight influence our perceptions of right and wrong.

Per the people I know, the Syrian people want democracy, but the current regime loves the money that comes from being ruler-tyrants. (I think wikipedia sourced the growth of Assad's personal fortune as $1.5 billion in offshore accounts.) My Egyptian friends say that removing the democratically elected president of the country and putting the son of the previous ruler in his place was financed by the local rulers of the surrounding kingdoms who didn't want to see democracy spread.

[HangOnKids]

51. Detroit wants demoracy, but the current government is letting them sink

and they are falling into a shit hole. "local rulers of the surrounding kingdoms who didn't want to see democracy spread." Eat that Ida.

[IdaBriggs]

55. Not really sure what you are trying to say; my opinion

on the debacle in Detroit is quite clear.

I find your tone to be abrasive and "eat that" to have the ring of an attempt at a non-hideworthy insult. If that is not your intent, please be aware it is how I am reading it.

[Summer Hathaway]

33. An incredibly heartfelt

and insightful post.

Thank you for sharing your up-close-and-personal story, and your thoughts on the matter, in such an articulate and eloquent way.

[mike_c]

34. let's be clear-- I'd be very happy to see Assad deposed....

Nonetheless, the fact that we have sufficient might to accomplish that doesn't even begin to make it right. We are not the world's cop. In fact, we're signatory members of the international body that comes closest to actually being the world's cop, and any action we take should be taken as international partners through the U.N. And if the U.N. is too dysfunctional to act, then let's acknowledge that as a separate problem and work on fixing the U.N.

I do not support war for its own sake, and since Assad is no threat to us, we have no defensive stake in war with Syria, or even a limited attack against Syria. Attacking another country absent a direct case for self-defense is a war crime. As signatories of the U.N. Charter we have agreed to be bound by that convention, and we have acknowledged that as the correct international ethic. When we push around smaller, weaker nations just because it's easy, or because we want to extort something from them, or even because we seriously don't like them, we're betraying our own principles-- unless "might makes right" is our new international principle. For too many, I think, it is. Ironically, it's essentially Assad's position, too.

Until Assad's troops or missiles begin landing on U.S. soil, I will unequivocally oppose war with Syria. We are not the international judge, jury, and executioner.

[IdaBriggs]

62. I understand this position, but I actually do support a "global

police force" concept. I think "kill XXX number of people" should automatically trigger it (even if the country doesn't have a resource we want to steal).

I realize that is not how the real world works, but murdering tyrants are a special kind of evil, in my mind.

[Just Saying]

36. Definitely an interesting perspective.

I feel for the people in Syria and would actually prefer that we use our resources for humanitarian efforts along with the UN but I realize that's being overly optimistic. I really don't want to see us get involved in another war for a number of reasons including the loss of civilian and American lives, the cost and the futility of involving ourselves in another country's civil war. Seeing the gassing of civilians is heartbreaking but it's just so complicated.

Thanks for posting the point of view of Syrians. We can do all the research in the world, but the best perspectives come from the people themselves although they clearly aren't all in agreement. I'm not sure how we would go about removing Assad if we even have the will and authority which is questionable.

And don't even stress about those who think personal attacks are a form of debate. I feel like their tactics reveal either a very weak argument or complete inability to express their point of view. Some people think being loud and nasty makes them right but Rush Limbugh proved that false long ago. And there's always the alert button if they go too far. There are supposed to be standards here.

[LWolf]

37. I disagree with your stance.

I don't have any names to throw at you, though. I understand your stance, and I also have a horror of ANYONE being killed.

I just don't think that killing to stop killing works effectively. I'm universally against killing.

I don't think you are evil for wanting a different solution than I do. We both want a solution. I just think you are wrong about the means.

[IdaBriggs]

61. The nice thing about a discussion board...

is that we can discuss the different thoughts we have about things, and how we arrive at our reasoning.

Thank you for sharing yours.

[LeftyMom]

56. Finally somebody remade the "I have a black friend" argument for foreign policy.

Truly this is a great day in the history of fallacious reasoning.

[frylock]

59. ftw

[KT2000]

63. How brave you are

in light of the white hot responses.
This has me torn. It is about genocide. Those who were in the vicinity of those bombs and survived will also be affected by the chemical. Many will live the rest of their lives with chronic illness.

I grew up in a neighborhood with many holocaust survivors, which means the suffering of people had to be stopped by someone. Generations were changed by that nightmare.
I think we should have done something about Rwanda. The reasons for not doing something may be our shame.

I think we have to do something about this horrid act. It should not stand unopposed. I just don't know what the response should be. Like you I just have to trust the president.

[IdaBriggs]

64. My ex-Israeli military friend always says,

"When we say NEVER AGAIN, we mean FOR ANYBODY." It is a very powerful statement that I support.

I agree with you about Rwanda.

Thank you for the compliments, but honestly, it is DU. I learn a lot here, and I like to think people learn from me, too. And somedays, people just like to beat the crap out of you because at least you are listening when they don't think anyone else is! Lol!

[Vinnie From Indy]

72. The only thing I have learned from you here is that you want OTHER people

to die for your uninformed desires.

Just how many deaths are you willing to bear to "take out Assad"? You have been very firm in stating and restating your desire to remove Assad from power. Therefore it is perfectly appropriate to ask you how many Americans and Syrians are you willing to commit to your position. 10? 100? 10,000? How many?

[Marrah_G]

92. everyone except the Palestinians

Not the best choice of statements....... just saying.

On most things I think we probably agree, and I think you are a good person. I just REALLY, really disagree with you on this and find some of the things you have said on this topic to be really screwed up.

[IdaBriggs]

93. It is a quote from someone I respect. And he has *definite*

opinions on the Palestinian situation.



It is okay to disagree, I think - this *is* a discussion board.

And yes, I find a lot of what you say to be amazing, so I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts (even if you don't agree with me).

[Marrah_G]

95. .

[davidpdx]

67. The most interesting part that I caught from your post

was the sheer underestimate of the number of people that have been victim to the gas. I have heard only low numbers, so that was a bit of a shock to me.

[NoOneMan]

68. Yeah, I asked a homeless guy I know

He said who fucken cries when rain burns. So yeah, its a no go officially

[Hekate]

69. That was thoughtful, and thank you for your courage in sharing it here and now

No flames from me, Ida. I don't know which way the dice will fall, and I don't have a "position" on Syria, but by the gods the venom-spewing taking place at DU is worse than useless.

[Douglas Carpenter]

77. no doubt you could have found many Iraqis living in America who wanted Saddam gone so much that they

even supported an invasion to accomplish it. In fact almost all Iraqi-Americans would have preferred to see Saddam gone and did rejoice at his downfall. But that did not change the dynamics of Iraq and that made the invasion into a disaster - even if it was initially welcomed by many. Almost all Vietnamese living in America at the time of the Vietnam War strongly supported the American presence in Vietnam - But that was not representative of Vietnam as a whole nor did it change the essential dynamics of the war.

This article below was written more than a year ago when at the time no one was suggesting direct U.S. military involvement - but the points are still the same:

Liberals arguing that the U.S. should give weapons to Syrian rebels underestimate Assad's power

I strongly recommend reading this article in salon.com by Gary Kamiya:

http://www.salon.com/2012/04/13/dont_arm_syrias_rebels/singleton/

snips:

This is not a knee-jerk left-wing response. It has nothing to do with Iraq. Nor does it have anything to do with the proxy war between the U.S. and its allies and Iran and its allies. It is not driven by pacifism or opposition to all war. All U.S. wars are not axiomatically foolish, evil or driven by brutal self-interest (although most of them since World War II have been). The airstrikes on Kosovo and the Libya campaign were justified (although the jury is still out on the latter intervention). If arming the Syrian opposition would result in fewer deaths and a faster transition to a peaceful, open, democratic society, we should arm them.

That analysis has been provided by a number of in-depth reports, most notably a new study by the International Crisis Group, as well as the excellent on-the-ground reporting of Nir Rosen for Al-Jazeera. The bottom line is simple. The war has become a zero-sum game for Assad. If he loses, he dies. But the only way he can lose is if he is abandoned by his crucial external patron, Russia, which is extremely unlikely to happen absent some slaughter so egregious that Moscow feels it has to cut ties with him. Assad has sufficient domestic support to hold on for a long time, and a huge army that is not likely to defect en masse. Under these circumstances, giving arms to the rebels, however much it may make conscience-stricken Western observers feel better, will simply make the civil war much bloodier and its outcome even more chaotic and dangerous.

The key point concerns Assad’s domestic support. Contrary to the widely held belief that most Syrians support the opposition and are opposed to the Assad regime, Syrians are in fact deeply divided. The country’s minorities – the ruling Alawites, Christians and Druze – tend to support the regime, if only because they fear what will follow its downfall. (The grocery on my corner in San Francisco is owned by a Christian Syrian from a village outside Damascus. When I asked him what he thought about what was going on in his country, he said, “It’s not like what you see on TV. Assad is a nice guy. He’s trying to do the right thing.”) As Rosen makes clear, Syria’s ruling Alawite minority is the key to Assad’s survival: Absent an outside invasion, the regime will not fall unless the Alawites turn on it. But the Alawites fear reprisals if the Sunni-dominated opposition, some of whose members have threatened to “exterminate the Alawites,” defeats the Assad regime. The fear of a sectarian war, exacerbated by the murky and incoherent nature of the opposition, means that the minorities are unlikely to join the opposition in large numbers.

...

Our national instinct is to come riding to the rescue. It goes against our character to simply sit on our hands. Our sincere, naive and self-centered belief that America can fix everything, and our equally sincere, naive and self-centered belief that moral outrage justifies intervention, is a powerful tide, pulling us toward getting directly involved in Syria’s civil war.

But in the real world, we cannot always come riding to the rescue. Sometimes, we have no choice but to watch tragedy unfold, because anything we do will create an even bigger tragedy.

http://www.salon.com/2012/04/13/dont_arm_syrias_rebels/singleton/

[Warpy]

79. Assad is scum. That is not up for debate, it's a fact.

However, I don't really want him gone. There would be a power vacuum and we would likely have another rabid theocracy to deal with in short order unless the military opposed him and put forth another dictator as bad as Assad and possibly worse.

What I would rather see is everyone exhausted by war and forced to talk to each other, Assad caving to the more sensible demands and being unable to act quite as freely as a vicious dictator as he has.

I don't think military intervention at this time is warranted, nor should the US be the party that does it.

It's hard to watch these videos and not be passionate about doing something, anything to stop what's going on.

The truth is that the anti Assad forces are just as bad as the pro Assad forces and we don't have a dog in this fight. There is little constructive we can do at this point.

The best we can do is wait for them to tire themselves out with slaughter the way Lebanon did and then help them pick up the pieces. As long as we don't inflict Repblicans and MBAs on them, it's a way to turn a hostile country more friendly.

Bombs, rockets and drones won't do that.

[NealK]

81. Sigh.

AP sources: Intelligence on weapons no 'slam dunk'
Source: AP

WASHINGTON (AP) — The intelligence linking Syrian President Bashar Assad or his inner circle to an alleged chemical weapons attack that killed at least 100 people is no "slam dunk," with questions remaining about who actually controls some of Syria's chemical weapons stores and doubts about whether Assad himself ordered the strike, U.S. intelligence officials say. . .

A report by the Office of the Director for National Intelligence outlining that evidence against Syria is thick with caveats. It builds a case that Assad's forces are most likely responsible while outlining gaps in the U.S. intelligence picture. Relevant congressional committees were to be briefed on that evidence by teleconference call on Thursday, U.S. officials and congressional aides said.

The complicated intelligence picture raises questions about the White House's full-steam-ahead approach to the Aug. 21 attack on a rebel-held Damascus suburb, with worries that the attack could be tied to al-Qaida-backed rebels later. Administration officials said Wednesday that neither the U.N. Security Council, which is deciding whether to weigh in, or allies' concerns would affect their plans.

Intelligence officials say they could not pinpoint the exact locations of Assad's supplies of chemical weapons, and Assad could have moved them in recent days as U.S. rhetoric builds. That lack of certainty means a possible series of U.S. cruise missile strikes aimed at crippling Assad's military infrastructure could hit newly hidden supplies of chemical weapons, accidentally triggering a deadly chemical attack.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/ap-sources-intelligence-weapons-no-slam-dunk-070731192.html

[bigtree]

82. nothing in there about our own constitution; the claim that this is about OUR national security

. . .nothing about the blowback or consequence to their neighbors . . .

I can appreciate their self-interest, but, the issue of US intervention in what is essentially a civil conflict is broader and more complex than whether friends of yours from Syria support the action.

[Glassunion]

83. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

Here is the part that is hardest for people to get through their head... History repeats itself. The human race is fantastic at repeating its mistakes. Since the dawn of time, when the first human being made war on another human being, the result has been horrific. This will not change. All war is horrific.

You say "I still support intervention and I pray that Obama and his leadership team will make good decisions for the benefit of the Syrian people.", to that I simply will say that the result will not be what you desire. It will be horrific. All war is horrific. There are no good decisions when your first decision is to start killing people. Yes some people do need killing, but the machine of war cannot be tamed. It will kill thousands of innocent men, women and children. It always has... It always will...

I'm not saying your opinion is wrong. I am saying that it will come at a very high price. History has proved this time and time again.

[IdaBriggs]

84. I get what you are saying. The war against the Syrian people

Has been going on for a while now by their own "leaders".

The atrocities (and I am not using that word lightly) in my opinion warrant humane, targeted intervention.

I want Assad and his generals held accountable. No one should think they can get away with the things they have been doing.

If other options can be found, I will support them; ignoring it has made things worse with the death toll continuing to rise.

I support intervention, and repeat my prayer for good judgment to the benefit of the Syrian people.

What else can a person of conscious do?

[Savannahmann]

87. Then allow me to ask some questions.

First. How do we punish Assad and not remove him from power? President Obama has said we are not going for Regime Change.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/27/us-syria-crisis-obama-intelligence-idUSBRE97Q0S820130827

So we aren't going to punish the man who we say issued the orders, we're going to punish him by killing the guards, technicians, and workers at chemical weapons storage and manufacturing plants.

Now, there is no doubt that when we bomb those plants, we're going to be releasing Chemical Weapons into the air, probably killing a number of people downwind.

So we're going to Punish Assad for using Chemical weapons on the Syrian People. We're going to punish him, by bombing people who work at the plants, and gassing the people who live downwind. Assad himself isn't going to be harmed one bit, and it will probably reduce, but not eliminate current stocks of weapons, and certainly won't prevent him from making more.

Then there is the problem with our allies. The French and UK, both of which have spent the first part of the week beating the war drums have both backed off. The UK deciding to wait until Parliament can vote, because it turns out that the UK Parliament are not nearly so enthusiastic about bombing the stink out of Syria as Prime Minister Cameron is.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10272555/Cameron-backs-down-on-urgent-Syria-strikes.html

The French have gone from demanding punitive action to seeking a political solution. Oh, and France wants to help the Rebels, the ones you admit are a problem. Switching the people from a Dictatorial thug to a Theocracy probably isn't going to improve their lives in any meaningful way, but at least Assad won't get away with bombing his own people.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/29/us-syria-crisis-hollande-idUSBRE97S0CU20130829

Then there is the US Congress. Since this situation does not threaten the United States directly, they would really like President Obama to make the case to them and allow them to consider giving their approval. That's the whole War Powers Resolution.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/08/growing-bipartisan-coalition-urges-obama-to-seek-congressional-authorization-for-syrian-strike/

Egypt won't allow our ships to transit the Suez Canal, so they don't support intervention in Syria. Jordon has said they will not assist in any way.

So under what authority will we use force to punish the people at the plants in an effort to teach Assad a lesson? Any UN Resolution? Sure we have the King of Saudi Arabia. But is that enough authority to do what we propose, which is both ineffective, and asinine?

Now finally, we get to the situation with Russia and China. Both oppose action. Politically, we can ignore them, and avoid going to the UN for authority, and just do what we think is right. But here is the problem, what is to stop them from doing what they can say they think is right? They have ships, and submarines, in the Med. They can move more there more easily than we can. They can fire a warning shot across our bow while we are firing one across Syria's bow.

http://news.yahoo.com/russia-sending-warships-mediterranean-report-082257880.html

My final question is this. Are you prepared to start World War III because Assad is a bad guy? Are you willing to increase tensions between the three largest powers, all armed with nuclear weapons, over Syria? Especially when our outlined actions, the general goals, are so weak? We're not talking about taking him out of power. We're not talking about going in, and setting up a new Government, an action that our allies would object to. We're not talking about doing anything but killing more of the Syrian People to punish Assad for killing the Syrian People.

If we had a plan, if we had a goal, that would be one thing. But we are acting without any thought what so ever.

[Glassunion]

90. I have no answers. I really wish I did. But, it is a very difficult situation.

"The atrocities (and I am not using that word lightly) in my opinion warrant humane, targeted intervention." - This would be near impossible by airstrike. Airstrikes, for the most part, do a whole lot of killing and are rarely "targeted" with surgical precision. I have never heard of one being humane. For good old fashioned surgical precision, you need a ground force to go in, identify a target and eliminate it. Snipers do this best.

Good judgement will be not to start another war. How to get there is anyone's guess.

[Marrah_G]

94. Dropping bombs ( and our bombs are the big ass kind) on Damascus will not do that

History shows that Assad won't be hit and instead innocent people will die. I understand that you want assad out. The only way that happens is with ground troops in a ground war. The except would be if we luck out and after the bombs some of his own people take him out.

[Jamastiene]

89. You make very good points.