I am genuinely ambivalent about bombing Syria

[LuckyTheDog]

Last edited Wed Aug 28, 2013, 03:38 PM - Edit history (1)

This is a tough one because the use of poison gas is a clear violation of international law. If al-Assad really did use it, then the world (the West, especially) should not just stand by and let him get away with it.

But... I have to question why this is our problem to fix. I also worry about escalation of the conflict - especially if Iran gets involved. This could be a major war that we don't need and won't help Americans live safer, better lives.

That's my two cents' worth.

[Recursion]

1. How dare you inject nuance and complexity into a polemic??? (nt)

[GeorgeGist]

2. Why ...

(the West, especially)

?

I would think the neighbors have more reason to be outraged.

[The Magistrate]

3. Ambivalent On It Myself, Sir

My attitude towards this for some time has been that overt action backing the rebellion is not wise, as it would mean owning whatever they did with victory, which is not likely to be pleasant.

The situation now illustrates the problem with making explicit threats: when you make an explicit threat, you have to follow up on it if called. You commit yourself in advance to a course, and make your action contingent on what someone else does. But you are stuck with it all the same....

[jberryhill]

4. That's not allowed here

According to the DU terms of service, you must not only be cocksure of the correct opinion within five minutes of a breaking story, but you must also be smug and condescending about it.

Now that Obama has committed every able bodied American to go to Syria and commit atrocities, you must spit on the ground every time his name is mentioned.

Just like when he told everyone to go out and gut punch social security recipients.

[sufrommich]

5. I think most americans feel the same ambivalence.

I think most Americans regardless of political party,realize the role of world policeman is costing us dearly.

[cali]

6. here is an excellent article about why bombing Syria won't help

I suggest reading the Spinney article as well:

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/before-you-conclude-that-precision-bombing-makes-sense-with-syria/279086/

[KittyWampus]

7. Do you think those of us who are still ambivalent haven't read widely?

[cali]

12. some are, some aren't. gotta a problem, kittty

with my posting links to articles?


Sorry if you do, but I have no intention of stopping. Have you read the Fallows piece? The Spinney piece?

[Xyzse]

8. Same here

Also have to wonder what the effect of mentioning "Red Lines" and not doing anything.

I tend to believe the "speak softly and carry a big stick" policy. Unfortunately, the way our foreign policy has gone is more talk than action, so is talk and talk big. I didn't enjoy hearing threats, especially since it was questionable if we would do anything to begin with.

We don't need another front in the myriad conflicts we have gotten ourselves in to.

[pipi_k]

9. Sadly, you shouldn't

have to hide.

I'm ambivalent too.

I don't want to see yet another war. No more deaths of any kind.

yet, how do I deal with the images I saw last night on the news...one of them a dead baby, only a month old...

little kids gasping for breath...

a young boy with parts of his skin burnt off...


I can't get them out of my mind, and I want whoever did those things to be punished severely.

But, what are the consequences...

I truly don't know what the "right" answer is here.

[Skidmore]

10. I am happy to see that there is someone else who feels this way.

I loathe war, but having lived in a region where those sorts of attacks occurred, it would have been nice to think back then that someone would come to our aid and try to eliminate those who were using these materials.

I am very uncomfortable with the idea that this could escalate into a regional war with religious undertones. I would prefer that we withdraw all military aid from all sides.

There are no easy answers in the Middle East and much of the distress there has been fomented by Western nations and their zealots. The notion that injecting systemic instability into the area worked when there was another superpower to balance out the equation.

Currently, I think the people of this nation need to call for Congress to get back into session before taking action. Congress does need to be part of this.

[whttevrr]

11. I am not ambivalent...

I do not think we should act against Syria. I do not see how our missiles will help the people of Syria.

[one_voice]

13. I'm right there with you..

I feel the same way. Glad I'm not alone.

[treestar]

14. It's a very tough question

And a tough situation for us to be in, including Obama. Those who dismiss it out of hand as certain that nothing should be done are just knee jerking.

[LuckyTheDog]

16. Just about any president would bomb Syria at this point

I guess if it is going to be done, I'd rather have Obama in charge as opposed to, say, John McCain or Mitt Romney.

[KittyWampus]

15. So am I. But then, I am okay with ambivalence.

[Skinner]

17. I just saw this thread.

I just want to say that I wish DU had a little more appreciation for ambivalence, and a little more skepticism of certainty. Not just on this issue, but on everything.

So, yeah, I get where you're coming from. Totally.