Reuters: Pope, Jordanian king agree dialogue 'only option' in Syria

[Faryn Balyncd]

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope Francis and King Abdullah of Jordan agreed on Thursday that dialogue was the "only option" to end the conflict in Syria, the Vatican said, as the United States and its allies weighed plans for a military strike....Abdullah flew to Rome specifically to meet the pope to discuss the Middle East crisis. The king, Queen Rania and the pope spoke privately for 20 minutes in the Vatican's apostolic palace.

The king and the pontiff "reaffirmed that the path of dialogue and negotiations among all components of Syrian society, with the backing of the international community, is the only option to end the conflict and the violence that each day cause the loss of so many human lives, most of all among the defenseless population", the Vatican said in a statement.

Last Sunday, the pope spoke of "atrocious acts" following an apparent poison gas attack that residents in a Damascus neighborhood say killed hundreds of people....The pope and the king met a day after U.S. officials described plans for multi-national strikes on Syria that could last for days, and as Washington and its European and Middle East allies said Syrian President Bashar al-Assad must face retribution for using banned weapons against his people

http://news.yahoo.com/pope-jordan-king-agree-dialogue-only-option-syria-113542890.html

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Interesting

I see a dial back

[fried eggs]

2. Best suggestion yet!

[oberliner]

3. It's amazing we still live in a world with Kings and Popes

Hard to believe sometimes.

[Scootaloo]

5. Harder to believe that, in at least this case, they make more sense than the elected guys

King Hussein and Pope Whatshisname are right on this - the only hope for Syria is an ind to the civil war. The best way to end the civil war is diplomacy. Picking a side and launching missiles on their behalf isn't going to stop the fighting, and it's not going to benefit Syrians.

[fujiyama]

6. Ha, didn't even think about that

Yeah it is weird. I guess in some ways, societies haven't really changed that much over the last several thousand years.

Then again, I was watching some interesting videos recently on male chimpanzees grouping together and having what appeared to be brutal wars against others. It was pretty fascinating. In one case, a group of them attacked one and even threw a rock, killing him.

In some other ways, we haven't really evolved that much over the last million or so years.

[liberal_at_heart]

4. Sad that we live in a world where war is the first response instead of last resort.

[The Straight Story]

7. Let's pray the killing away like some people pray their kids' cancer away

Pretty sure the results will be the same.

[Dragonfli]

12. Killing the killing away is just as nonsensical with often even worse effects

to use your analogy such faith in violent solutions may well end up "killing the kid with cancer and two of the neighbor children for good measure".

"Faith in prayer" and "faith in killing" are both comprised of mystical doctrine and nonsense rather than rationality, but I can actually respect the one over the other.

Now as a tactic, Diplomacy aimed towards peace is not prayer it is just as stated a tactic, much like killing people with missiles for a desired outcome is a tactic, and in this case it is the tactic most likely to have a positive outcome if you think about it.

[The Straight Story]

13. We can bomb radar sites and air defense systems

We don't have to bomb homes and schools (like Syria did today).

[Dragonfli]

15. That will do what exactly to help the common people that are being ravaged by war? What?

Help one of the other factions? Can you say they will not use this "help" to bomb homes and schools for their victory power grab? Al queda and countless varying other militant factions are now humanitarian groups with humanitarian goals in your opinion?

Is this for a fact the way you know we will "help" if we are foolish enough to enter and expand the conflict as you hope?

We as a nation do not tend to worry so much as you do personalty regarding casualties when using our drones or going after targets with missiles, our hands have plenty of collateral blood on them for you to possibly believe that we as a nation do.

Offensive military strikes in unstable regions help no one but Generals and fighters on one side or other of a complicated war torn area.

Adding more bombs will not help people, (the civilians just die from rounds fired from all sides including our own sacred bullets), "bombing aid" helps only Generals or rebels soon to become Generals that are far more likely to have power as their goal than altruism towards the civilian populations as you appear to assume.

Only a slowing or end to violence ever helps the common people caught in that violence, civilians stop being slaughtered in war only when war ends not when more actors show up with more weapons that they will inevitably be caught in the crossfire of.

As a tactic, aiding those working towards peace rather than aiding shady competing warlords with air strikes and weapons is the best chance if you want to help civilians avoid senseless slaughter.

Faith in killing is stupid.
Extremely stupid IMO.

Trying desperately to find ways to end the killing may be difficult or even quixotic at times but it is not as stupid as killing people to help other killers on the off chance that they will be kinder killers that kill fewer common people in an oppressive war torn region.

Faith in killing is the stupidest religion of all and you disappoint me by not even getting the basic absurdity of the idea of bombing for peace.

[The Straight Story]

16. My views

1. Doing nothing won't help. UN, Saudi Arabia, etc are already helping the refugees (Saudis just gave 300 million to the effort)

2. Striking strategic sites won't upset the balance in the civil war (rebels don't have planes). This will weaken assad's ability to defend himself should he continue, cost him money, and show him that we are serious.

3. 5.4 million dead in the congo now since 1998. UN has been there since 1999. Almost 6 million dead because no one wanted to get too involved. The war there won't end anytime soon. How many more have to die before the UN sends enough force to protect those being slaughtered?

4. Not saying a troops on the ground style war. Remove defenses, block him from replacing them, and send a message that gassing your own people 14 times is not acceptable anywhere in the world.

We could just send money and arms, both of which will be used by either side to kill more people.

OR we could just ignore all those people dying, go back to our TV, and watch sponge bob squarepants all day.

Guessing many don't care about them dying, let them alone, assad will kill as many as he wants and they are just humans. Well, they are HIS humans right now to kill if he so desires, in any manner he chooses.

So we might as well send a message to all nations - use chemical weapons all you want, cause no one will ever do a thing about it.

[Dragonfli]

17. "Sending a message" is the most idiotic phrase ever used to justify escalation and the most common.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023562075

[Alamuti Lotus]

8. if that was true, why is Jordan presently hosting military chiefs from the US and satellite regimes?

Jordan is currently hosting military delegations from the US, its satellites in the Gulf dictatorships (bastions of freedumb and democrazy) and various other potential collaborators in the proposed foreign aggression against Syria. They don't find any cognitive dissonance in making statements like this?


Reference:
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/08/2013825222334772650.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/24/us-syria-crisis-meeting-jordan-idUSBRE97N08L20130824
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/25/syria-west-military-options-generals-jordan
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/26/world/meast/jordan-syria-robertson

[jsr]

9. The Pope is such a meddlesome wussy peace purist

If the He-Man War President says war is necessary, it is justified.

[MattSh]

14. You forgot a part...

If the He-Man Nobel Peace Prize winning War President says war is necessary, it is justified.

[Dragonfli]

18. Bombing for peace is the new enlightened mantra of peace prize winners

Old outdated peace prize winners still cling to their lack of will to use proper explosives while actually advocating the use of "diplomacy" and "political solutions" aimed at peace or the slowing of violence like the losers they are. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023562075

Obsolete old relics like Carter don't understand tactics that revolve around finding political or diplomatic solutions aimed at peace or a slowing of violence are not as effective as exploding even more ordinance in war torn regions, thus "sending messages" that can be read in the explosive debris like chicken guts gazed into by a Shaman.

It is time for the hope of a new pragmatic breed of Peace Prize winner, one that understands that the dynamics of peace are the dynamics of death in a wonderful balance of power, death, explosion and the best form of communication available, destruction.

I am glad there is Change.
I welcome the concept of the new warrior peace proponents.

Finally Nobel laureate that understands that peace and the end of civilian deaths are found down the barrel of a well aimed gun!!!

We finally have such a peace warrior and I for one am optimistic that bombing for peace is the most pragmatic solution ever conceived of and explosions are rightfully the new olive branch for the 21st century!!!

[pacalo]

10. I'm not a religious person, but I'm very impressed with this new pope.

This is great:

The king and the pontiff "reaffirmed that the path of dialogue and negotiations among all components of Syrian society, with the backing of the international community, is the only option to end the conflict and the violence that each day cause the loss of so many human lives, most of all among the defenseless population", the Vatican said in a statement.

[freshwest]

11. Agree totally. This is good.