Why Should the United States Get Involved in the Civil War in Syria?

1. 90

   Dr Billy Kiddposted 10 years ago

   Foreign policy analyst Norman Bailey claims that all across the Middle East Shia and Sunni Muslims are fighting each other. They still are battling in Iraq, even after the U.S. spent $1 trillion dollars and ten years trying to impose America's version of government on the people there. The truth is that there is nothing the U.S. can do to stop the religious war in Syria. Baily says: "The only entities the Sunni and Shi’a Arabs hate more than Israel and The United States, are each other."
   http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/04/29/ … t-threats/
   Your thoughts...?

   replyreport
   1. 75

      alancaster149posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Best stand back and let them knock seven bells out of one another. Interfering will only bring them back together to use you (or us) as target material. They don't mix here either, so we finish up with double the number of mosques dotted around big UK cities. Don't forget all these other Islamic minorities who also have their own meeting places. If push came to shove they'd all like to get together and biff us.

      replyreport
      1. 90

         Dr Billy Kiddposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         Now, I get the UKIP political party thing. I did not understand it, alancaster149, until you put it into perspective--a circling of the U.K. cities with mosques and with people unwilling to assimilate. In the U.S. it is a different story. There are 11 million undocumented immigrants but by the second generation they're running for public office!

         replyreport
         1. 75

            alancaster149posted 10 years agoin reply to this

            What about the radicalised idiots who bombed the Boston Marathon. The story was they were keen on US women, and then the older one starts wanting his girlfriend to wear a burka(?) Did the younger brother go along with it because he was weak-minded, or did he think it might be 'fun'? The mother, speaking from Chechnya maintains they were 'framed'. The father had plans to go to the US but thought better of it and claims he stayed away 'for health reasons'.
            The Indians and West Indians/Africans here do a reasonable job assimilating, but the likes of Abu Qatada want to establish Sharia Law here and hang everyone who 'insults' islam. We have 'honour' killings as well, where worshippers of one brand of Islam don't want their daughters going out with worshippers from another sect and 'bump them off'. We have several different grades of Pakistani immigrants, the 'burka' bunch, with just a slit to look out of, the headscarf bunch who don't mind showing their faces, and the liberals who walk about like the Indians and do a better job of assimilating. The Bangladeshis are grouped similarly but all seem to live in the same part of the big cities, swamping schools and changing the rules because they're the majority. I could go on all day...

            replyreport
            1. 63

               maxoxam41posted 10 years agoin reply to this

               Did they bomb the boston marathon or was it the FBI? It is too easy to put the blame on amateurs that was said that triggered the bombs with a toy remote control. The problem is that cookers act like a Faraday cage therefore it would be impossible.

               replyreport
               1. 96

                  wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  It is also too easy to claim the FBI did it (is there any killing in the US you don't blame on them?) without providing a shred of evidence.
                  
                  Of the two (too easy) answers, I'll take the one with evidence.  And without fake "science".  (Remove once handle screw and dangle an insulated wire out the hole it was in - there goes the Faraday cage).

                  replyreport
                  1. 63

                     maxoxam41posted 10 years agoin reply to this

                     The FBI knew them and they did nothing? It doesn't trouble you? And by the way, which evidence do you have besides the lies of the mainstream media?
                     If I have to remove everything where's the point of using a cooker?

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        Superkevposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                        Max, you are mad as a hatter my friend.

                        replyreport
                     2. 96

                        wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                        I prefer they do nothing until they have absolute evidence that will stand up in court.  Not a guess (like "we know the FBI did it because US government is evil").  You may feel differently, that authorities should jail people based on nothing more than suspicion.
                        
                        Your proof that the media is lying, please?
                        
                        Somehow, I never would have thought of a single handle screw (there are typically two) as "everything".  It still leaves the other screw, the handle, the lid and the regulator on top.  You could, I guess, even use that hole and would have done nothing but tip the cooker upside down and allowed the regulator to fall off.
                        
                        Why is it that you never think of these things?  Because it ruins a perfectly good conspiracy theory?

                        replyreport
            2. 90

               Dr Billy Kiddposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               I think terrorism is a new, worldwide meme--a behavior that's communicated through cultural outlets and the news. So I think the Boston Boys picked it up in Dagestan and thought it would be cool to try in the U.S.
               
               Calls for sharia law just would not make it in America. Women are too free. So you don't even hear about it. Rather, you hear Sheryl Sandberg, the COO at Facebook. telling women to "Lean In." She means that you lean into your future in business not lean away from it. So much advice from a self-made billionaire.

               replyreport
2. 60

   jimbrad121posted 10 years ago

   The united states should not get involved. Not unless their 'private war' threatens the united states. The US, contrary to some peoples opinion, is NOT the worlds policeman!

   replyreport
   1. 90

      Dr Billy Kiddposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks for the comment.
      I keep thinking that the U.S. should not be the world's policeman. And now that you bring it up--that unless there is a threat, stay out--I'm now thinking that the debate on these things is generally about the threat, and that debate is often exaggerated. You know, if the current regime did not use their chemical weapons against the U.S., why would the next regime in Syria use them against the U.S.?

      replyreport
      1. 75

         alancaster149posted 10 years agoin reply to this

         We're in the same boat, you and us. Afghanistan is our 'ring' at the moment and the fight's more like Thai Boxing. I daresay there are hawks in or around Whitehall itching to get to grips with Assad. Syria was France's responsibility up to WWII, maybe they should send in their Foreign Legion on this, after all the 'Legion' is a sort of UN in itself!

         replyreport
         1. 90

            Dr Billy Kiddposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Brilliant idea--sending in France's Foreign Legion. I've been following the Guardian, off and on, but I did not realize Whitehall was taking this war in Syria as serious as some of the reactionary members of the U.S. Congress--who want war now, immediately.

            replyreport
   2. 63

      maxoxam41posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with you.

      replyreport
3. 63

   maxoxam41posted 10 years ago

   Who said that there were religious wars in the middle east? Isn't it a propaganda to justify our intervention? A propaganda justifying our loot?

   replyreport
4. 77

   Mighty Momposted 10 years ago

   It's already starting, the rationalization.
   It's not that Syria is a direct threat to the US.
   But to our Mideast BFF Israel.
   Which has already struck on Syria.
   Obviously the US now HAS to rush in behind Israel in support.
   I mean, that's obvious.
   Isn't it?
   Maybe you have to be an Israel Firster (which I am not) to get it.
   If I'm wrong acribing motives,
   I'd be very, very interested in hearing from anyone who is hawking war because they care
   about the Syrian people.

   replyreport
   1. 90

      Dr Billy Kiddposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Senator McCain pretended to care about the Syrians at first. Now he has become a fear monger,, saying that if the U.S. don't stop 'em there they'll bring their poison gas to the U.S. But that's the same nonsense we heard about Saddam Hussein and the non-existent nukes.
      
      But the idea of religious wars....10,000 protestors on May 1 in Indonesia fighting the police, wanting the secular government to impose Islamic Law.
      Then there's the daily suicide bombings in Iraq, Sunni Moslems bombing the Iraqi Shiite Moslem government buildings and police.
      Then there's Al Qaeda in Yemen battling the moderate Islamic government.
      And  there's religious battles all over Pakistan, with regular bombings in Karachi.

      replyreport