Home > Uncategorized > My Verdict On Syria

My Verdict On Syria

The U.S. has a long history of military intervention in other countries for capitalist gain. Having said that, I’m still not sure where I stand on Syria. If Assad is definitively using chemical weapons, then yes, he must be stopped. The Erstwhile Conservative makes a strong case for our intervention in this post.

The Erstwhile Conservative: A Blog of Repentance

My friend, and a thoughtful blogger and careful thinker, Jim Wheeler, commented on the last piece I wrote on Syria, comments which included:

The extremists prefer polemics to analysis of the real issue, which is whether the U.S. can be sufficiently inspired by the indiscriminate deaths of 400 children to formally accept a role as world policeman for WMD’s.


The difficulty of getting a decision on this that is correct for the long pull is just that, people aren’t good at long-range planning.

I will use my reply to Jim as a statement on my position on what the U.S. should do relative to the use of chemical weapons in Syria:


As I have previously stated, and despite what Secretary of State John Kerry said today before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the United States is, if there is ever to be one, the world’s policeman. There simply…

View original post 1,784 more words

Categories: Uncategorized
  1. mac
    September 4, 2013 at 3:09 pm

    I’d agree he should be stopped – but not by America alone. It should be an exercise for getting the UN to get together and learn to process some issues beyond the old politics in the Security Council.
    Some random unilateral bombs is not the way to go imo.


    • September 4, 2013 at 3:32 pm

      I agree with you on this Mac. If we go it alone, or even with the help of the usual suspects, it’s just going to look like business as usual for our perpetual war money generator. There needs to be earnest support from the U.N, including Russia. Russia is the real player in the region: Without them, anything that we do just looks like another drone and troop backed money grab.


  2. September 4, 2013 at 10:40 pm

    There is an honest-to-goodness democratic revolution going on in Syria; read this to gain some real insight into what is going on. While a punitive strike to buttress Obama’s “credibility” should be opposed, the grassroots rebels–on the ground inside the country–need to be supported.


  3. Sedate Me
    September 8, 2013 at 12:12 pm

    I’m torn also. If anybody deserved a military invasion, it’s this douche. Unlike Saddam, we KNOW he has weapons of mass destruction because he’s using them on his own citizens. If it wasn’t for Obama’s “red line” statement, absolutely nothing would be happening. It’s amazing the difference having some gooey old dinosaur bones under your soil can make!

    What I’m certain of is that whatever America winds up doing, it will be done for the wrong reasons. Other than providing some more profit for the Military Industrial Complex, Why attack Syria at all if your intent isn’t regime change? Getting this guy out is the ONLY reason to do anything. Launching a few cruise missiles at a couple of soft targets is barely worth the nonexistent risk to guys who voluntarily joined the military to get paid to kill “bad guys”. (Shit, after seeing the kind of firepower used to go after 2 lone fuckheads, the Boston paramilitary police might be able to take Syria.)

    The only reason anything might happen is purely to remind everyone that they can’t disobey the American Empire. No matter how weak, feeble and close to death it is, it’s still a fucking lion and you best beware.


    • September 9, 2013 at 11:31 am

      You’re arguments against are every bit as valid as Duane’s arguments for. This is why I’m still sitting on the fence over this. Yes, Assad is an evil bastard who is committing unspeakable crimes against his own people. Yet, we have to question the motives of our own country when we bluster about putting a stop to him. How is Assad any different than the countless regimes we’ve supported in Central and South America, Africa, etc? If we were already in Syria developing our economic interests, would there be such a blow back over Assad’s crimes? I don’t think so. I think we can all agree that Assad must be stopped and removed. However, I can’t condone the U.S. taking this task on alone solely for our own economic interests.


      • Sedate Me
        September 11, 2013 at 3:28 pm

        No doubt about the overall selfish, and often malevolent, track record of the US Empire’s foreign policy. However, given the “all bets are off” attitude of the US Empire as of late, why is there such internal resistance among The Powers That Be themselves to attack a nation that has been on the US Enemies List so for many decades? 1) In fairness, KGB run Russia is doing some cock-blocking. 2) Most importantly, Asshat ain’t got no oil in his country.

        In short, there ain’t no economic incentive for war, just MORAL incentives. Therefore, neither the establishment, nor the people, want to do sweet fuck all even when there is essentially NO risk involved AND there’s the ability to legitimately claim the moral high ground. This reflects VERY poorly on Western governments AND their people. It sends a clear message that Westerners are all hypocrites who operate solely out of self-interest. (aka the truth) So cue Obama’s suggestion at token strikes that will achieve nothing but obscuring Western hypocrisy. But now it seems that even that non-action might get derailed if Asshat’s regime pretends to hand over its chemical weapons. Insult to injury.

        An air war exposes US Empire’s storm-troopers to minimal risk. But what about using the in-desperate-need-of- legitimization Drone Strike program? What about using the now routinely used Targeted Assignation program?

        It operates without any due process. Anyone in the world, even US born citizens on US soil, can become targets based merely upon the desire of “high ranking US officials” to kill them for crimes such as operating a hate-filled website calling for violence, or just being the teenage son of a guy operating a hate-filled website calling for violence, http://www.democracynow.org/2013/6/7/exclusive_nasser_al_awlaki_to_obama

        As a dictator who funds terror, uses torture, indiscriminately attacks & gases his own citizens, I think Asshat most certainly qualifies under that program’s very low threshold, a program that kills more innocent civilians than actual targets. Yet that action has been specifically taken off the table. Why? Is it because it’s an action that might achieve something done out of moral principle?

        And The Powers That Be consider that the WORST possible precedent to set.


        • Sedate Me
          September 15, 2013 at 1:13 pm

          And then I came across this disturbing story regarding the drone strike I mentioned above. http://www.propublica.org/article/drone-war-doctrine-we-know-nothing-about

          Apparently, the latest official version is that this teenage American wasn’t targeted for being the son of a target. He, and the people he was with, were targeted without having any idea who they were because they fit some “profile” Such profile/signature strikes supposedly make up a large chunk of drone attacks. It’s a lot like Stop & Frisk, only the frisking is being done by Flying Death Robots.

          At what point does this cross into genocide?


          • September 15, 2013 at 11:50 pm

            What do you make of this? It seems like common sense to me.


              • Sedate Me
                September 16, 2013 at 11:37 am

                I could ramble on at great length about this masterstroke. Believe it or not, this IS the short version.

                1) It’s no longer a mystery why Putin is President for life. He’s enthralled all the brown-shirt types with his homoerotic, macho-man porn. And yet he can tie the entire US Empire into knots with a simple Letter to the Editor at a time when most Americans don’t even know what letters or newspapers are!

                He’s so good, you forget HE is the reason the UN can’t/won’t do anything to a guy who uses WMD and killed over 100,000 people. Putin has his back because Asshat’s dad was a good friend of the Soviet Union (aka: the supposed Evil Empire out to enslave us all)

                You know things are really bad for the US Empire when the spy-turned-dictator of a washed up enemy power tells America what to do…and America does it. Since when does America even listen to its friends???

                America cried “uncle” because Americans no longer have the guts, or the moral fortitude, to do the right thing (whatever that actually is in this case). After it submitted, Vlad helped America back to its feet. He offered it a chance to save face and still pretend that it won by doing something serious in Syria. However, what’s really happening is Father Russia is taking Asshat’s dangerous play toy from him. It’s so embarrassing, I can barely look.

                2) American exceptional self worship-ism. As I said on another blog you visit, every single time a non-American hears this term, they roll their eyes and/or think about burning a US flag. It IS a very dangerous concept. Does anybody remember the last nation that walked goose stepped around telling everyone that it and its people were superior. Look what happened when their people bought into it?

                However, the American Empire is in its Post Stalingrad phase now, so the world won’t have to endure the “exceptional-ism” routine much longer. Although, the Operation Clausevitz Phase is going to make Downfall look like a Disney film.


                • September 18, 2013 at 9:24 pm

                  The idea of “American Exceptional-ism” is indeed nothing more than arrogant bullshit. But then again, at least to me, the whole idea of nationalism is arrogant bullshit. I’m an anarchist, so honestly I would be just fine if nationalism, or countries for that matter, didn’t exist. Of course, that has nothing to do with the topic at hand: I just thought I would throw my two cents out there when it comes to nationalist pride.


  4. September 10, 2013 at 9:36 pm

    My main fear about our involvement in Syria is that it will turn into a larger conflict somehow. That fear may be premature or unfounded, but we are just now in the process of getting out of two miserable wars, so the thought of us getting mired in a longer mess again is in the back of my mind. A few surgical strikes–if it remains limited to that–hmmmm, maybe.


    • Sedate Me
      September 11, 2013 at 3:36 pm

      The only friend Syria has left in the world is KGB Russia and what is Putin gonna do? Give Obama more dirty looks at conferences?

      For what it’s worth, I think there’s more validity in the argument that doing nothing will encourage other sleazebag nations to kill their dissidents/protesters/rebels and completely innocent citizens looking for democracy. Not that they need more incentive.

      There are better reasons to be against military action.


      • September 11, 2013 at 9:48 pm

        I hope you’re right!


      • September 13, 2013 at 12:56 am

        What do you make of this article? http://lightbox.time.com/2013/09/12/witness-to-a-syrian-execution-i-saw-a-scene-of-utter-cruelty/#1

        It details the some pretty gruesome execution scenes committed by the rebels. Do you think this retaliation is warranted? Are these executioners even the true rebels? The article mentions that one eye witness thought that they were an arm of Al-Qaeda.


        • Sedate Me
          September 15, 2013 at 3:31 pm

          Then again, as a youth, I remember seeing a LOT of news reports regarding South Africa and the violence going on there. Specifically, the “necklacing” being done in the name of ending Apartheid in South Africa. It was a method used to ensure loyalty amongst varying factions and a way of punishing collaborators with the South African regime.

          That was back in the day when the “news” still had the balls to show the raw story, no matter how ugly. Unfortunately, it’s so ugly and historically uncomfortable, (and pre-Internet) I had to go to some seriously ugly places on the Internet to find this. Be very aware!

          The website is run by…I’m not sure what the hell they are…but they have a very interesting video. It’s FAR more gruesome than your link but well worth watching. I actually saw it on TV at the time. It’s quite -er- eye opening and strips aside some of the simplistic notions of “good vs evil” of the Apartheid fight we have since framed it in. Especially that clip of Winnie Mandela saying “With our necklaces, we shall liberate this country.” Gulp.


          The opinions presented were quite mainstream. As the video shows, the Reagan Whitehouse had them. Like with Syria, it really was quite easy to make an argument for doing nothing in “such a complex, violent, situation” out of fear of what might happen and who might take over.

          My point is, the use of violence to solve problems can make even the “good guys” look pretty damn evil. Lucky for America, it’s evil isn’t so face-to-face. It happens in places nobody pays attention to and is generally kept secret.


  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: