Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Kapanda

I don't know if anyone is following what's happening in Syria...

16 posts in this topic

http://www.c-span.org/Events/International-Reaction-to-the-Syrian-Conflict-the-Assad-Regime/10737432295-1/

10 minutes of this video made me wonder if this woman is lying... I know there is historic precedence, but I don't understand how a supposed leader, even if he thinks he is right, can treat his people like that and still believe he ought to remain in power...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

The last time the US went in and toppled a brutal dictator's regime, the world and most of America screamed.  We won't be making that mistake twice.  I hope all we do is secretly funnel money to the government opposition in hopes of keeping this turmoil going.  As bad as the Syrian government is, if it was replaced, I'd sure the new one would be just as bad in time.  For whatever reason, that seems to be how things roll over there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you be more specific on which dictator you have in mind? Coz my thought is you meant Qaddafi, and the World likes the fact that he's gone, in a campaign that America self-descriptively "led from behind"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Kapanda

Could you be more specific on which dictator you have in mind? Coz my thought is you meant Qaddafi, and the World likes the fact that he's gone, in a campaign that America self-descriptively "led from behind"

I was referring to Iraq.  Technically the US did not topple Qaddafi's regime.  And why is it America's responsibility to fight every ruthless dictator?  Why can another country ante up some sack and do it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was referring to Iraq. Technically the US did not topple Qaddafi's regime. And why is it America's responsibility to fight every ruthless dictator? Why can another country ante up some sack and do it?

Contradictory?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by jamo

Contradictory?

Sorry about that.  Meant to say "why can't".  Typo there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Mr3Wiggle

I was referring to Iraq.  Technically the US did not topple Qaddafi's regime.  And why is it America's responsibility to fight every ruthless dictator?  Why can another country ante up some sack and do it?

I don't mean to sound like some bleeding heart (although I probably do) but I agree completely with Mr3Wiggle.  Don't we have enough problems in America that we should be paying more attention to than we do because we're always standing up for democracy in some third world country that likely doesn't want to be democratic anyway?  Since Mubarek was ousted in Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood has been trying to take over the country.  If we go over there to intercede we'll just alienate another country's populace when we should just stay the f#"@ out of the way and let things run their course.  We're just interfering in Syria as well.  Unless someone asks for the USAs help let's just defend America rather than flex our offensive muscles worldwide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Mr3Wiggle

And why is it America's responsibility to fight every ruthless dictator?  Why can another country ante up some sack and do it?

Perhaps a history lesson is in order.

America is historically very late to fight ruthless dictators. Hitler, for example.

Otherwise, they'll support one to get what they want.

Ever heard of Nicaragua.

Ever heard of the Iran-Conra affair?

Or fool an uneducated population into thinking that one  (Saddam) has something to do with other events like 9/11.

BTW  - there are about 3 dozen countries with troops in Afghanistan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what needs to happen, though I am very inclined towards international action.

By the way, in situations like these, the Rwandan genocide comes to mind (though this situation is not nearly as terrible). There, the head of the UN mission, after the whole ordeal, either did - or almost did it, one of the two - commit suicide over the whole thing. He knew that, were he to get the authorisation to stop the killing, he could've easily done so.

It is well known that children are being targeted in Syria. There is no legitimacy whatsoever for the Assad regime, but no external action will only allow the killing to keep on going.

Good news, the ex-Syrian Ambassador to Iraq came out saying that the regime will die in a matter of time. But time means lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by NuclearMike

I don't mean to sound like some bleeding heart (although I probably do) but I agree completely with Mr3Wiggle.  Don't we have enough problems in America that we should be paying more attention to than we do because we're always standing up for democracy in some third world country that likely doesn't want to be democratic anyway?  Since Mubarek was ousted in Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood has been trying to take over the country.  If we go over there to intercede we'll just alienate another country's populace when we should just stay the f#"@ out of the way and let things run their course.  We're just interfering in Syria as well.  Unless someone asks for the USAs help let's just defend America rather than flex our offensive muscles worldwide.

Muslim Brotherhood is democratic though. Maybe they weren't in the past, I'm not thoroughly familiar with their history, but they are now.

And external help - America's if need (likely) be - does not mean implementing external standards per se, it can simply mean the mere protection of innocent lives, a universally upheld value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Kapanda

And external help - America's if need (likely) be - does not mean implementing external standards per se, it can simply mean the mere protection of innocent lives, a universally upheld value.

In theory I agree with you, but unfortunately protecting innocent lives always means loss of life on both sides.  I guess that just for once I'd like someone else to step in in instead of the USA to try to moderate someone else's internal conflicts.  If we consider the Middle East important it's because we're so dependent on foreign oil.  That's why we haven't stepped in in Sudan, Rwanda, or against Joseph Kony's murdering guerilla army (with a lot of members under 10 years old) in Uganda.  Most of Africa just isn't "important" enough since democratic Nigeria is its biggest oil producer.

I wish that we would protect innocent lives without there always being an ulterior motive, but that's not realistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by NuclearMike

I guess that just for once I'd like someone else to step in in instead of the USA to try to moderate someone else's internal conflicts.

Good Lord!!!! You have got to be joking!!!!!!!!!!!!

Are you Americans brainwashed at school?????????????????

Do you seriously believe that NO other countries do this?

The U.S.A. has a poor history in this regard and you (not YOU) invent reasons to invade other countries.

Apparently about 90% of Americans think that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11!!!!

You didn't do it in World War One or Two until late  - for example, but that's a minor detail isn't it?

Just "for once" ......... this is the type of ignorant arrogance that makes so many people despise your country. Who do you think you are speaking for????

And yes  I am REALLY GRUMPY about this - the thought of uneducated people sitting around in bars and at barbecues thinking that you do things which you don't.

What are the examples you have of being the only country to step in and "moderate seomeone else's internal conflicts"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Shorty

Perhaps a history lesson is in order.

America is historically very late to fight ruthless dictators. Hitler, for example.

Otherwise, they'll support one to get what they want.

Ever heard of Nicaragua.

Ever heard of the Iran-Conra affair?

Or fool an uneducated population into thinking that one  (Saddam) has something to do with other events like 9/11.

BTW  - there are about 3 dozen countries with troops in Afghanistan.

I'd be interested in an Afghan troop count.  Seriously.  Some countries have 10 guys there, literally.  I think outside of the US, UK, and Austrailia, every other country is there symbolicly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Shorty

Good Lord!!!! You have got to be joking!!!!!!!!!!!!

Are you Americans brainwashed at school?????????????????

Do you seriously believe that NO other countries do this?

The U.S.A. has a poor history in this regard and you (not YOU) invent reasons to invade other countries.

Apparently about 90% of Americans think that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11!!!!

You didn't do it in World War One or Two until late  - for example, but that's a minor detail isn't it?

Just "for once"......... this is the type of ignorant arrogance that makes so many people despise your country. Who do you think you are speaking for????

And yes  I am REALLY GRUMPY about this - the thought of uneducated people sitting around in bars and at barbecues thinking that you do things which you don't.

What are the examples you have of being the only country to step in and "moderate seomeone else's internal conflicts"?

Korean War (1950–1953) Communist North Korea, supported by China, invaded non-communist South Korea. UN forces, principally made up of U.S. troops, fought successfully to protect South Korea. The Korean War was the first armed conflict in the global struggle between democracy and communism, called the cold war.

Bay of Pigs (1961) The U.S. orchestrated the invasion, an unsuccessful attempt by Cuban exiles to overthrow Fidel Castro's communist regime in Cuba.

Vietnam War (1961–1973) In 1955, communist North Vietnam invaded non-communist South Vietnam in an attempt to unify the country and impose communist rule. The United States joined the war on the side of South Vietnam in 1961, but withdrew combat troops in 1973. In 1975 North Vietnam succeeded in taking control of South Vietnam.

Dominican Republic (1965) President Lyndon Johnson sent marines and troops to quash a leftist uprising in the Dominican Republic, fearing the island nation would follow in the footsteps of Cuba and turn communist.

Lebanon (1982–1984) U.S. troops formed part of a multinational peacekeeping force to help the fragile Lebanese government maintain power.

Grenada (1983) President Reagan invaded the Caribbean nation of Grenada to overthrow its socialist government, which had close ties with Cuba.

Panama (1989) President George H.W. Bush invaded Panama and overthrew Panamanian dictator and drug-smuggler Manuel Noriega.

Gulf War (1991) Iraq invaded Kuwait, and a U.S.-led multinational force came to Kuwait's aid and expelled Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's forces.

Somalia (1993) A U.S.-led multinational force attempted to restore order to war-torn Somalia so that food could be delivered and distributed within the famine-stricken country.

Bosnia (1994–1995) During the Bosnian civil war, which began shortly after the country declared independence in 1992, the U.S. launched air strikes on Bosnia to prevent “ethnic cleansing,” primarily by Serbs against Bosnians. The U.S. became a part of NATO's peacekeeping force in the region.

Kosovo (1999) Yugoslavia's province of Kosovo erupted into violence in the spring of 1999. A U.S.-led NATO force intervened with air strikes after Slobodan Milosevic's Serbian forces uprooted the population and embarked on the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo's ethnic Albanian population.

Afghanistan (2001– ) The Taliban government harbored Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda terrorist group, responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. After Afghanistan refused to turn over Bin Laden, the U.S. and UN coalition forces invaded. The Taliban government was ousted and many terrorist camps in Afghanistan were destroyed. U.S. and NATO troops remain in Afghanistan to support its fragile new government.

Iraq War (2003– ) The U.S. and Great Britain invaded and toppled the government of dictator Saddam Hussein. Troops remain in Iraq to combat the insurgency that formed after Hussein's defeat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[URL=http://www.infoplease.com/cgi-bin/id/A0828118] [COLOR=0066CC]Korean War (1950–1953)[/COLOR] [/URL] Communist North Korea, supported by China, invaded non-communist South Korea. UN forces, principally made up of U.S. troops, fought successfully to protect South Korea. The Korean War was the first armed conflict in the global struggle between democracy and communism, called the cold war. [URL=http://www.infoplease.com/cgi-bin/id/A0806555] [COLOR=0066CC]Bay of Pigs (1961)[/COLOR] [/URL] The U.S. orchestrated the invasion, an unsuccessful attempt by Cuban exiles to overthrow Fidel Castro's communist regime in Cuba. [URL=http://www.infoplease.com/cgi-bin/id/A0850869] [COLOR=0066CC]Vietnam War (1961–1973)[/COLOR] [/URL] In 1955, communist North Vietnam invaded non-communist South Vietnam in an attempt to unify the country and impose communist rule. The United States joined the war on the side of South Vietnam in 1961, but withdrew combat troops in 1973. In 1975 North Vietnam succeeded in taking control of South Vietnam. Dominican Republic (1965) President Lyndon Johnson sent marines and troops to quash a leftist uprising in the Dominican Republic, fearing the island nation would follow in the footsteps of Cuba and turn communist. Lebanon (1982–1984) U.S. troops formed part of a multinational peacekeeping force to help the fragile Lebanese government maintain power. Grenada (1983) President Reagan invaded the Caribbean nation of Grenada to overthrow its socialist government, which had close ties with Cuba. Panama (1989) President George H.W. Bush invaded Panama and overthrew Panamanian dictator and drug-smuggler Manuel Noriega. [URL=http://www.infoplease.com/cgi-bin/id/A0838511] [COLOR=0066CC]Gulf War (1991)[/COLOR] [/URL] Iraq invaded Kuwait, and a U.S.-led multinational force came to Kuwait's aid and expelled Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's forces. Somalia (1993) A U.S.-led multinational force attempted to restore order to war-torn Somalia so that food could be delivered and distributed within the famine-stricken country. [URL=http://www.infoplease.com/cgi-bin/id/A0107349] [COLOR=0066CC]Bosnia (1994–1995)[/COLOR] [/URL] During the Bosnian civil war, which began shortly after the country declared independence in 1992, the U.S. launched air strikes on Bosnia to prevent “ethnic cleansing,” primarily by Serbs against Bosnians. The U.S. became a part of NATO's peacekeeping force in the region. [URL=http://www.infoplease.com/cgi-bin/id/SPOT-KOSOVO1] [COLOR=0066CC]Kosovo (1999)[/COLOR] [/URL] Yugoslavia's province of Kosovo erupted into violence in the spring of 1999. A U.S.-led NATO force intervened with air strikes after Slobodan Milosevic's Serbian forces uprooted the population and embarked on the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo's ethnic Albanian population. [URL=http://www.infoplease.com/cgi-bin/id/SPOT-AFGHANISTAN] [COLOR=0066CC]Afghanistan (2001– )[/COLOR] [/URL] The Taliban government harbored Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda terrorist group, responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. After Afghanistan refused to turn over Bin Laden, the U.S. and UN coalition forces invaded. The Taliban government was ousted and many terrorist camps in Afghanistan were destroyed. U.S. and NATO troops remain in Afghanistan to support its fragile new government. [URL=http://www.infoplease.com/cgi-bin/id/SPOT-IRAQTIMELINE2] [COLOR=0066CC]Iraq War (2003– )[/COLOR] [/URL] The U.S. and Great Britain invaded and toppled the government of dictator Saddam Hussein. Troops remain in Iraq to combat the insurgency that formed after Hussein's defeat.

But where are the examples of the U.S.A single handedly doing what NuclearMike claims they do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Shorty

But where are the examples of the U.S.A single handedly doing what NuclaerMike claims they do?

No one really does it single-handedly any more.  For political reasons.  I'm just saying, over the last 50+ years, the US has more than shouldered it's duty to the international community.  Let someone else deal with it.  The US can bury it's head in the sand like the French.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0