Are you in favour of military intervention in Syria?

Yeah, someone should come up with a fake Superman. We could tell everyone he's always watching and will fuck you up if you don't play by the rules. Maybe we could write a book about his fictional exploits and claim it was written by Fake Superman himself. That can't possibly be a bad idea.

lololol, oh dear

Yeah, I'd like them to release the evidence they have. Though, from John Kerry's briefing, it appears rather extensive. Not to mention, we do have public evidence that a chemical weapons attack happened. So, it's not like just suspicions. The only evidence needed now is simply showing that it was indeed the regime, and it sounds like they have the evidence to show that. They have cables of them speaking about preparing the chemicals three days prior to the attack, cables on the day of the attack, and then cables after the attack discussing that they need to lie low before carrying out any more operations. They just need to release those now.

This is definitely very different from 2001 Iraq. Instead, it's more like Iraq back in the 90s when Saddam very conclusively used chemical weapons to kill the Kurds. Or more like the atrocities in Kosovo. That's what we have here. Now it all just needs to be presented into a compelling case.

Unfortunately, a lot of people(and countries) say they don't want to get involved even if there is conclusive evidence of a chemical attack; so, even with a good case, I don't foresee countries like Russia changing their tune and allowing the UN to do anything.

"I'm not going to lay out the specifics for how that should come around because that's not my job," is the specific line that I am responding to with that particular comment.

It may not be the literal job of anyone here to consider how to bring the UN out of its Security Council paralysis, but if that organization is your nominee to play the role of world policeman, then time should be given to considering how to address its weaknesses. A workable solution is not the expectation, but something beyond complete dismissal of that weakness should be.

Of course, this is dragging the conversation away from the topic at hand, which is completely my fault. So let me simply apologize, and let's back to things.

Yeah, I'd like them to release the evidence they have. Though, from John Kerry's briefing, it appears rather extensive. Not to mention, we do have public evidence that a chemical weapons attack happened. So, it's not like just suspicions. The only evidence needed now is simply showing that it was indeed the regime, and it sounds like they have the evidence to show that. They have cables of them speaking about preparing the chemicals three days prior to the attack, cables on the day of the attack, and then cables after the attack discussing that they need to lie low before carrying out any more operations. They just need to release those now.

This is definitely very different from 2001 Iraq. Instead, it's more like Iraq back in the 90s when Saddam very conclusively used chemical weapons to kill the Kurds. Or more like the atrocities in Kosovo. That's what we have here. Now it all just needs to be presented into a compelling case.

Unfortunately, a lot of people(and countries) say they don't want to get involved even if there is conclusive evidence of a chemical attack; so, even with a good case, I don't foresee countries like Russia changing their tune and allowing the UN to do anything.

If the UN authorizes it, yes. It looks likely to pass the General Assembly.

I'm not dismissing it either, group involvement over one guy is my preference. Clearly you don't share that stance so I see no reason in continuing this argument.

Fuck politics, man. Let's smoke the shit out of some guys.

EDIT: lol

Well, Canada and the UK stated they aren't going in, so if the US wants to, power to them. Though a UN resolution sounds like the best option.

Some people in here don't know what the fuck they're talking about. Straight up. Read news from sources other than CNN, MSNBC, etc. Remember that you're asking your peers to get themselves killed in a war we have no reason to get involved with. Staying away from casual news sources, I had no idea people were even considering going to war, then I start seeing how the "big" news organizations have been beating the war drums and I just can't believe what's happening. We have so much goddamn shit to figure out in our own country, let alone someone else's, I just can't even fathom the arrogance required for someone to think we should kill our own citizens because two irrational forces are slaughtering each-other over territory.

Look up pictures of what's going on in Syria. Look at the shit they don't show on TV: at the innocent children who are being shot to pieces, with their heads missing and their legs and genitals blown off. Watch something like Al Jazeera (English; not America) and every day you'll see footage from newly-bombed cities with innocent men, women, and children strewn about, missing limbs or half their face. Watch the town's citizens screaming and digging through rubble, trying to find survivors, or watch a man carry away the headless corpse of a child. Assad is killing his own people and bombing his own cities, and there's ceaseless instigation by both rebel forces, both of which are fighting for radical and irrational causes that'll ultimately bring about similar conflicts if they ever gain a brief hold on power. 'Good guys' don't exist in this war, and America sticking our dick in there isn't going to change that. It's a fucked up situation that we don't belong in.

@isomeri: this. The chemical weapons shit needs to stop here and now.

Calm down evolution-wankin atheist. The Superman I'm talkin about would actually show up at some point in the flesh. A hero not some deity/ruler.

Sorry you got nerve-pinched by your assumption of a religious construct.

You make a good point, it is stupid to tell them how far your willing to go, i guess i dont have a opinion right now, at least until we see what the UN releases on the chemical weapons attacks.

I haven't kept very informed about this subject, so I'm probably talking out of my ass. But personally I wish that my country would stay out of other people's business. I wish we wouldn't spend money on stuff like this when we're already in such a sorry state. But honestly if I were president, I don't think I'd be able to just leave them be if I felt I had the power to do something about the atrocities being committed there. It's sort of like a choice between doing what's right by your fellow americans, or doing what's right by your fellow humans. Though to be fair, who knows if our intervention would actually be any help.

This is pure speculation but I suspect we don't get to see the evidence because the chemical weapons have a big MADE IN THE USA on them. Probably from the Gulf War. That's the big problem still, countries selling weapons to other countries in less than stable regions and then paying the price later. It happens all the time.

Now the whole thing is one big mess and civilians are paying the price. The best thing probably would be to have UN peacekeeping forces protecting civilians but how do you do that, without going "World Police" or having another Srebrenica, I don't know.

What I do know is that launching million dollar missiles into the country is going to solve absolutely nothing. Personally I would just airdrop cat gifs.

Hey, so... I was joking. It was a play on the notion of an almighty power who would keep people in line. I found it funny. I made no assumptions about your beliefs or what you meant in your post.I just typed some shit because whatever.

I was joking. I find dumb shit funny.

Like, jokes and that.

Jokes. About Fake Superman.

JOKES.

Sorry you got nerve-pinched by your assumption of seriousness.

@planetfunksquad: This is probably, secretly why Syria is in a civil war. It all started with one joke about Asaad's mustache...

@planetfunksquad: This is probably, secretly why Syria is in a civil war. It all started with one joke about Asaad's mustache...

Truth. I'd be sensitive too if I looked like I had pubes glued to my upper lip.

My country is not, which I wasn't expecting.

My country is not, which I wasn't expecting.

It does bother me that there aren't more refugees during a really bad civil war. People tend to be a bit too attached to their place, family, and work. The prospects if they leave to some foreign environment often seem Grapes of Wrath-level uncertain, I guess. So unless there's a clear threat to them, average people stay, and many buy into the politics of someone else's power struggle. Mostly refugees were already socially isolated before the conflict, and all that changed is that they became more vulnerable.

In a better world, average people would be able to simply leave this bullshit behind en masse, all countries would be prepared to spend a large portion of their budget on resettling them temporarily or permanently, and the hardcore militants who stay on in failed states could starve or murder each other before the next harvest. That's if we valued life higher than all other concerns.

Anyway, I don't support intervention in favor of any side in the conflict. Containment, sanctions, and humanitarian efforts only. I may be a peacenik, but I think there's plenty of good that a country can do with its military assets in a shitty situation like this without entering into a state of war.

But say if it were me - if Saskatchewan and Manitoba somehow plunged all of Canada into a bitter sectarian struggle over which province is the flattest and most boring, perhaps. You can bet I'd abscond to Washington State with as many homies as I could pack into a truck.

@fattony12000: But for Government officials to call Miliband a "Fu**ing c*nt" was pretty amazing.

And when Eric Pickles chokeslammed Vince Cable through that table? God damn. Crazy shit.

Not like this. I don't see the upside, besides Obama living up to his "red line" remarks, which is a really stupid reason to risk spending a ton of money, getting mixed up in a civil war with no clear "good guys" and really pissing off Russia in the process. As far as I know, there's no hard evidence that it was even Assad who used the chemical weapons and the planned intervention will do nothing to tip the scales in favor of the rebellion, so it's nothing but downsides.

The full quote is:

"No 10 and the Foreign Office think Miliband is a fucking cunt and a copper-bottomed shit. The French hate him now and he’s got no chance of building an alliance with the US Democratic Party." - Government Source (bets on it being Malcolm Tucker)

@jeust: Not sure that's a possibility.

@jeust: Not sure that's a possibility.