Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
19 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why is it such a big deal when a leader in Syria gasses innocent civilians, including children, (Original Post) raccoon Aug 2013 OP
Because dying non-chemically is ok David Krout Aug 2013 #1
I know you are saying that sarcastically, but jazzimov Aug 2013 #6
Because Rwanda isn't on PNAC's list. NuclearDem Aug 2013 #2
BINGO!!! nt kelliekat44 Aug 2013 #5
Rwanda wasn't a big deal? geek tragedy Aug 2013 #3
It was a big deal at the time treestar Aug 2013 #4
But when Saddam gassed the Kurds, his own people, we sent Rumsefeld to shake his hand 4 months Bluenorthwest Aug 2013 #12
yup or why is is not a big deal that in our own country gopiscrap Aug 2013 #7
Or when Drones cause collateral damage? tecelote Aug 2013 #8
Because Tx4obama Aug 2013 #9
Interesting. Regarding the Geneva Protocols... MNBrewer Aug 2013 #19
what the holy fuck are you on about? Schema Thing Aug 2013 #10
Liberation... backscatter712 Aug 2013 #11
Timing fadedrose Aug 2013 #13
WTF? How was Rwanda not a big deal? uppityperson Aug 2013 #14
Both are a big deal alcibiades_mystery Aug 2013 #15
Has anybody ever said how many people died because Downwinder Aug 2013 #16
The atrocity is WAR n/t DearAbby Aug 2013 #17
That was a big deal. n/t pnwmom Aug 2013 #18
 

David Krout

(423 posts)
1. Because dying non-chemically is ok
Sat Aug 31, 2013, 06:23 PM
Aug 2013

It's only when murderers use chemical weapons that they are being mean.

jazzimov

(1,456 posts)
6. I know you are saying that sarcastically, but
Sat Aug 31, 2013, 06:29 PM
Aug 2013

in many ways it's true. Chemical weapons are banned internationally, but other means of killing are not. Perhaps they should be.

This is not an issue with any one country, but with the international community as a whole.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
4. It was a big deal at the time
Sat Aug 31, 2013, 06:27 PM
Aug 2013

Chemical weapons are much more frightening to the rest of the world however. All cou tries but 5 considered them worth a convention to destroy them.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
12. But when Saddam gassed the Kurds, his own people, we sent Rumsefeld to shake his hand 4 months
Sat Aug 31, 2013, 06:38 PM
Aug 2013

later and we gave Iraq coordinates targets in Iran when the US knew he was using chemical weapons. We knew because he had help making these weapons from firms in the US, UK, Germany, France and the Netherlands. So to pretend that the use of these weapons always gets military response is just bullshit. They were also used I the civil war in Yemen in the mid 60's.
Facts are facts. To pretend the US did not help Saddam, did not assist his use of gas and did not simply allow him to get by with it because we disliked Iran is self serving bullshit that disrespects the dead in those attacks.

gopiscrap

(23,760 posts)
7. yup or why is is not a big deal that in our own country
Sat Aug 31, 2013, 06:31 PM
Aug 2013

we mistreat and abuse those different than us, deny them their civil rights. Why is it not a deal when let our own folks starve so that corporations can become rich?

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
9. Because
Sat Aug 31, 2013, 06:34 PM
Aug 2013


-snip-

Before the Second World War

The Hague Conventions were two international treaties negotiated at international peace conferences at The Hague in the Netherlands: The First Hague Conference in 1899 and the Second Hague Conference in 1907. Along with the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Conventions were among the first formal statements of the laws of war and war crimes in the body of secular international law. A third conference was planned for 1914 and later rescheduled for 1915, but never took place owing to the start of World War I.

The Washington Naval Treaty, signed February 6, 1922, also known as the Five-Power Treaty, aimed at banning CW—but did not succeed because the French rejected it. The subsequent failure to include CW has contributed to the resultant increase in stockpiles.[2]

The Geneva Protocol, officially known as the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, is an International treaty prohibiting the use of chemical and biological weapons. It was signed at Geneva June 17, 1925 and entered into force on February 8, 1928. 133 nations are listed as state parties[3] to the treaty—Ukraine acceded August 7, 2003 and is the most recent member nation.[4] This treaty states that chemical and biological weapons are "justly condemned by the general opinion of the civilised world." While the treaty prohibits the use of chemical and biological weapons, it does not address the production, storage, or transfer of these weapons. Later treaties would address these omissions and have been enacted.

Modern Agreements

The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) is the most recent arms control agreement with the force of International law. Its full name is the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction. This agreement outlaws the production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons. It is administered by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), an independent organization based in The Hague.[5]

The OPCW administers the terms of the CWC to 188 signatories which represents 98% of the global population. Of the stockpiles, 44,131 of the 71,194 tonnes declared (61.99%) have been destroyed. The OPCW has conducted 4,167 inspections at 195 chemical weapon-related and 1,103 industrial sites. These inspections have affected the sovereign territory of 81 States Parties since April 1997. Worldwide, 4,913 industrial facilities are subject to inspection provisions.[6]

-snip-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_weapons



p.s. But you're right - all killing should be should be considered to be a 'big deal'.

MNBrewer

(8,462 posts)
19. Interesting. Regarding the Geneva Protocols...
Sat Aug 31, 2013, 08:29 PM
Aug 2013

The the US consider that the treaty "Ceases to be binding as to the use of chemical weapons in regards to any enemy state which does not observe the prohibitions of the protocol."

I guess we can legally gas Syria now.

fadedrose

(10,044 posts)
13. Timing
Sat Aug 31, 2013, 06:41 PM
Aug 2013

We are all fed up with war and killing.

If the rest of the world would feel the same, something could be done to end it...negotiations, debaters, opinions, speeches, all of that is needed, and I'd watch most of it...

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
15. Both are a big deal
Sat Aug 31, 2013, 06:41 PM
Aug 2013

Try a better premise next time.

These "inconsistency" posts are easy to pull off. Indeed, it's hard to fail one, like you did here.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why is it such a big deal...