General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI support a military strike to disable Assad's capability to use chemical weapons again.
This, in and of itself, is horrific and dehumanizing. Enough.
Harmony Blue
(3,978 posts)what about that problem?
pinto
(106,886 posts)NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)Thatll teach em
neverforget
(9,433 posts)the strike.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Though of course there's also the question of whether or not Assad used them in the first fucking place.
Funny how quickly such unfounded assertions are accepted as hard fact, isn't it?
pinto
(106,886 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)The rebels have been found with gas weapons in their possession.
Reports cite that the rebels have used sarin shells before.
The rebels were losing ground to the Syrian military and not gaining it back prior to this attack; obviously this places the upper hand with the military.
So. Just to draw it all together, Assad had nothing to gain from using these weapons - he was already winning. He has everything to lose from using these weapons, because of, well, exactly what we're seeing now. On the other hand, the rebels would have everything to gain and nothing to lose from a chemical attack - again, as seen from the current trajectory of events. And of course both sides are completely aware of all of this.
So why would Assad make such a tactically pointless move that he knew would only injure his position and empower the insurgents? Bashar al-Assad is a despotic dick. He's a weird elf-looking man. But he is not stupid or hasty by any measure.
Now, the bottom line is we don't know who conducted the attack - frankly we aren't even sure there was an attack, it wouldn't be the first time for false positives over something like this. Currently there are a team of UN investigators well, investigating. Any amount of logic or reason would suggest, hey, we should wait for their findings before we start making decisions. However, the United States has declared investigations irrelevant and announced that we're doing this no matter what, fuck the UN and its "investigations."
I for one, however, think investigations are very relevant; if it turns out Assad did do something monumentally stupid, okay, now we know and let's look at options. If it turns out the rebels were behind it, then won't we be glad we didn't waste lives and money dipping our collective nuts into that fire?
pinto
(106,886 posts)I think this week will be telling, in an international setting.
Yet I disagree with your assumption that the use of chemical weapons is in dispute. Regardless of who is responsible - I'll leave the room for dispute here, despite the preponderance of evidence - it simply needs to end.
It simply needs to end.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)pinto
(106,886 posts)Yeah, the last 12 years have made me sceptical to an extent. But they haven't blinded me to day-to-day reality. This needs to end.
I've no delusions about the long term Syrian situation - it's a civil war.
But this has to end.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)how would you make that determination.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)backscatter712
(26,355 posts)Killing toddlers is much easier than actually finding deadly weapons such as chemical weapons, and genuinely rendering them useless.
My prediction: We'll blow a lot of shit up, there will be plenty of "collateral damage", and sometime down the road, we'll be facepalming when we find out what was missed...
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)most likely they would target command and control centers and other high value military targets - that would simply attempt to degrade Assad's forces. At what point do they stop? What if Assad's forces hit back?