Syria: This is not a revolution. Stop this nonsense.

[Azdgari]

Lots of Americans die when we launch cruise missiles. True story. There are little men inside working the explosives... valiant.

So if we want to be more sure about who used the chemical weapons, what's the plan? The UN has bailed, showing its ineptitude per usual, not other country is concerned enough to make an investigation. Any ideas on that front? At this point the US and France appear to be the only ones concerned about the incredibly egregious international crime committed by 'someone' in Syria (hint: is it the rebels or the regime that failed to ratify chemical weapons treaties, admitted to developing a program and reopening it in 2012, has been deplored by human rights watch for torturing and killing dissidents, etc etc). And I'll admit the rebels are no saints, but I know where I think blame lies. I'd love to see the UN confirm those Sarin samples that we found, though.

[SlayerOfLight]

If this will turn out to be a full-blown war, I can't help but feel sorry for all the U.S soldiers that will sacrifice their lives for NOTHING.

That is, if the U.S isn't gonna launch missiles from a safe distance (killing innocent Syrians in the progress). Either way, innocent people will die.

[DGFone]

That is, if the U.S isn't gonna launch missiles from a safe distance (killing innocent Syrians in the progress). Either way, innocent people will die.

As if they're not dying already, waiting for the UN, and the rest of the world, to decide as to what they are going to do.

[SlayerOfLight]

That is, if the U.S isn't gonna launch missiles from a safe distance (killing innocent Syrians in the progress). Either way, innocent people will die.

As if they're not dying already, waiting for the UN, and the rest of the world, to decide as to what they are going to do.

Thanks for pointing out that which is even obvious to a three years old, but I'm talking about the fact that more Syrians would die if the U.S would attack then there are already dying right now. Cheers.

[Azdgari]

Is that based on some data that you could provide, Nicholas? Especially considering that cruise missile attacks would A) be limited and B) Exclusively target Assad regime targets. In other words... now = civilian targets. US attack = military targets. So if by 'Syrian' you mean 'Syrian civilians', then there's absolutely no question about which course of action is more humane.

[TheBlackCatCrossing]

I was going to write a wall of text critical of Woeler's above post, but all I can really say is this:

Oh jeez...

That's because college kids think that they know everything when they take Poli Sci or Soc 101, doncha know?

In all seriousness, there is no point for the US to get involved. There is a recession going on, we have to fix ourselves up. They money used to fund the military is ridiculous when there are problems on the home front. This is a problem for Syria. Let THEM handle it.

[Regulus]

I was going to write a wall of text critical of Woeler's above post, but all I can really say is this:

Oh jeez...

That's because college kids think that they know everything when they take Poli Sci or Soc 101, doncha know?

Pfft. Of course I know everything, silly.

[SlayerOfLight]

Is that based on some data that you could provide, Nicholas? Especially considering that cruise missile attacks would A) be limited and B) Exclusively target Assad regime targets. In other words... now = civilian targets. US attack = military targets. So if by 'Syrian' you mean 'Syrian civilians', then there's absolutely no question about which course of action is more humane.

Well I can conclude the following:
A. Innocent civilians may even be close to the ''military'' targets.
B. Intervension may empower radical jihadists.
C. It may also trigger a much bigger war with even more civilian casualties (obviously).
D. The U.S tends to be quite clumsy with aiming their missiles, so the missiles might not even hit the targets at all.

[Azdgari]

If you care so much about civilians why are you proposing that the world ignore the wildly inhumane chemical mass murder of 1500 of them?

[SlayerOfLight]

If you care so much about civilians why are you proposing that the world ignore the wildly inhumane chemical mass murder of 1500 of them?

Because there's no solid evidence that the Assad regime is behind the chemical attack... In fact the Assad regime even wrote a letter to the United Nations to protect them against America's aggression. Besides, Assad would totally accomplish nothing with a random chemical attack lol. Assad is the only protection for the ''normal'' Syrians and non-islamic people. If he falls, Those people won't be having an easy time under the rule of the radical islamic rebels. People ignore how the rebels executed CHILDREN, but complain about a so-called chemical attack performed by Assad's regime. That's just stupid...

But of course, if the U.S.A (A nation that is being downright dishonest to it's own people) says that Assad was behind the chemical weapon attack, then you better believe it