You know the hysterics regarding Syria are truly disrespectful

[pasto76]

someday folkswill get it; calling this shit a 'war' is an insult to the millions of soldiers who have rotated through iraq and afghanistan. It is degrading. Cruise missiles dont keep us from home, cruise missiles havent sent our suicide rates skyrocketing. The divorce rate through the roof. Domestic violence is in the stratosphere. Nobody is going to get pulled from their civilian life and lose their business, job or place in school.

WAR does that. Not a few ships firing missiles.

maybe you dont like the idea of doing anything in syria and thats OK. but jesus H christ the absolute -HYSTERIA- from folks is really really out of hand. It would be nice if you all could actually respect what many of us have been through - for whatever reason - and not minimize our sacrifices and experiences by calling missile strikes a war. were the monica missiles 'war'? Hell no

[David__77]

1. You have no idea what you're talking about.

You certainly don't have a sense of the consequences of what the administration proposes. You make wrong assumptions that there will be none.

[NuclearDem]

5. [phone]

Arming the mujahideen in Afghanistan wasn't a war and didn't put troops in harms way, but look where that got us.

[pasto76]

33. no, you're correct, I dont have 'a sense'

I have MEMORIES. I lived those consequences. What have you done? Which is my point exactly.

[David__77]

39. It's not about me personally.

But the impact of war on my own family - Vietnam to be precise - molded my own views and those of my family. That's why I oppose any more immoral and unjust wars.

[JimDandy]

67. Exactly...that's how Vietnam got started. First 'advisors'

then secret supplies of ammunition, then 'strategic strikes' and all the sudden we were at war. We, the citizens just weren't told at first that all these precursors were really the signs of an unauthorized war.

[BainsBane]

99. That isn't the template for every intervention

This is more like Bosnia and Libya. I understand the opposition to bombing Syria. What I have trouble understanding is willful distortion of available evidence. Did Duers react this way to Libya? If not, why is Syria so different to you all?

[lumpy]

42. I get where you are coming from. No problem.

[Fumesucker]

2. An easy rule of thumb to figure if something is a war or not

Would you think it was war if the other side did exactly the same to you?

[tazkcmo]

6. This n/t

[LearningCurve]

24. You beat me to it

[Hydra]

26. +1000

We don't get a double standard for being "the good guys."

[Proud Public Servant]

43. Actually, technically, here's the thing

If the other side didn't put boots on the ground, but just fired missiles at me, and then disengaged as quickly as they engaged, I wouldn't think it was a war.

I'd think it was an act of terrorism.

[VanillaRhapsody]

53. Unless it was an act against the Bush Administration right?

You people...I suwannee!

[pa28]

63. Thread winner.

[dflprincess]

85. Agreed! n/t

[Hydra]

97. Totally

Props to that poster.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

104. This could be the post of the month. Nicely said. n/t

[avaistheone1]

113. I think you are parsing words.

We have a war on terrorism, largely because 3 planes were used as missiles to attack Americans on 9/11.

[HardTimes99]

121. Oh, snap! - nt

[woo me with science]

65. Thank you.

[DirkGently]

71. Bingo. n/t

[Supersedeas]

94. now that's reasonable

[avaistheone1]

114. I think so, fumesucker.

[HardTimes99]

119. We'll call it a war when Syria or its allies sink one or more of our ships (as she

has every right to try to do under international law).

[malaise]

144. +1,000

[leftstreet]

3. Bullshit. US Military Industrial Complex has earned its reputation

It doesn't 'do' anything for humanitarian reasons

It does it for the money

[unhappycamper]

146. Yup.

Follow the money.

[rug]

4. Frankly, I'm more concerned about what is about to happen to the Syrians.

They're not volunteering for any of this.

[lumpy]

45. Right. They certainly didn't volunteer for getting gassed and will not volunteer for any future

atrocities by Assad.

[rug]

81. They didn't volunteer to be in the middle of air strikes either.

Assuming it doesn't turn into a "war".

[reformist2]

7. If it's really as minimal as you say, it will have a minimal impact on Syria.

[daa]

8. International war crimes are just that whether by Bush or oBOMBa.

We are broke but there is always money for 2 million dollar missiles. We have 4000 veterans here in Atlanta. Take care of them before starting another WAR. You don't sound like a veteran because you forget, when you start a war the other guy gets a vote.

If its not war then maybe it's what? A terrorist attack?

[pasto76]

37. Im sorry I 'dont sound like a veteran' to you

Its going to affect the rest of my life and career.

you know this is typical of way leftie people. I can put up, you cant, so you disregard and denigrate my service to 'level the field' in your eyes. Guess what bud, you'll never play on my level

[rug]

82. What do you call "way leftie people"?

[RetroLounge]

100. "way leftie people"

We call that a "tell" in poker.



RL

[daa]

152. Het bud

I never want to stoop down to your level, it's easy to be a chickenhawk hiding behind dron and tomahawks. If ths was Bush you people would be screaming. May be you even forget what Iran did to one of our vaunted Aegis missle carriers the last time we bunched up in the Mediterranean.

An act f war or terrorism elicits a response and it may not be the one you want.

So just how much social security are you willing to waste on this?

[VanillaRhapsody]

60. We are NOT declaring a war...Hysterics is right!

If we take out his ability to employ further chemical weapons and deter other dictators and tyrants from doing the same...do you still call that terrorism?

[Logical]

9. LOL, you realize that soldiers are required to fire these missiles? Soldiers that are away...

from their family just so we can do this shit?

[pasto76]

34. uh, no sailor will fire them. Sailors that are on float already

pretty different than a 16 month deployment were we live in country. We never had 'taco night' in my FOBs and TAAs

[VanillaRhapsody]

107. Yeah...huh...I am aware...I am the child of a "Lifer"

[Taitertots]

10. If it is not war, what is it (would it be)? Just plain old murder?

Good ole fashioned hegemony?

It is the UScentric world view, It isn't a war because it burden OUR troops.

[VanillaRhapsody]

62. or could it be....diminishing his ability to use more chemical weapons

and deterring other tyrants from doing the same?

[truebluegreen]

90. You are so romantic.

And so is your view of air strikes.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023578368

[VanillaRhapsody]

95. You are linking to an Onion piece and you call me "romantic"?

how cute by half!

[Taitertots]

154. It could be that too

I don't understand why you think that would mean that it isn't war.

[VanillaRhapsody]

155. if we just remove his chemical weapons....that is not necessarily a war...

I don't know why you would think that a bad thing....

[Taitertots]

156. The way you say it almost trivializes what you are proposing

Because "just remove his chemical weapons" is really send hundreds of large bombs. Unless there is a plan that I have not yet heard about to get his chemical weapons.

I don't know why you think whether or not it is a good thing changes whether or not it is a war.

[VanillaRhapsody]

157. Hundreds? How do you know that?...

did you read the technology I just presented?

There is no call for carpet bombing is there?

[Taitertots]

158. Hundreds? Reasonable estimation

"did you read the technology I just presented? "
I have no idea what this means.

What makes you think that the absence of calls for carpet bombing indicate whether or not an action is a war?

[HardTimes99]

122. Plain ole imperialism - nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. Under the UN Conventions we have signed it is a war crime

you deal with that.

[lunasun]

128. Ive seen multi posts calling for the end of the UN too here tonight

just amazing thinking .....where am I??
Be one way to get around it being a war crime I suppose.....

[Autumn]

12. I really wonder if the Syrian people are feeling hysterics.

A few ships firing missiles can hurt and kill a lot of them. But it's all fucking good. We will be on the sending end, not the receiving end.

The Syrian people can deal with it, after all the Cruise missiles won't keep us Americans from home, cruise missiles haven't sent our suicide rates skyrocketing. The divorce rate through the roof. Domestic violence is in the stratosphere. Nobody is going to get pulled from their civilian life and lose their business, job or place in school. And best of all they won't kill or terrify us Americans

Yay team.

[Lee-Lee]

13. This may sound crass and selffish

But I am more worried about 2014 and 2016 here.

When we lob some cruise missiles in what you want to call a "non-war", and then Assad or whomever uses chemical weapons again showing it was totally ineffective- what credibility will the President, or anyone who supported him, have with the American people?

If this gets out of hand, it could cost us the Senate and White House...

[Douglas Carpenter]

14. so if Iran were to fire 100+ cruise missiles at the United States - that would not be war?

If these strikes were aimed at military command and control centers in the United States- this would not be war?

[Moses2SandyKoufax]

28. I guess the bombing of Pearl Harbor wasn't an act of war either? n/t

[n2doc]

52. You know that even 1 missile fired from Iran would be an Act of War

And we would retaliate 1,000,000 fold.

[City Lights]

59. Exactly! nt

[hopemountain]

15. the op asked for r*e*s*p*e*c*t

for soldiers who have hit the ground with their boots on and to try to distinguish the difference between missiles and hand to hand combat.

all of your posts above are very disrespectful of a vet or a loved one of a vet who suffers from wounds that do not heal.

shame on you. is it too much to ask for respect and for keeping the distinctions he or she outlined?

do you really mean to be so condescending to think the op has no idea of what it means to fire missiles?

[leftstreet]

17. Where are people disrespecting soldiers?

[durablend]

19. "Agree with me or you hate the troops"

Pretty much what his (her) argument boils down to.

[leftstreet]

20. That used to be a rightwing tactic

I can't keep up

[Moses2SandyKoufax]

29. That's it, it's officially 2003 again. n/t

[sendero]

32. An argument that probably works..

.. if you have an IQ of 80 or so.

[pasto76]

46. Im glad you dont see it

try and open your mind and step into my shoes. I just laid out how, to me, this hysteria and way over the top rhetoric minimizes the actual wars we just went through. Scratch that are still going through one. Or keep your blinders on, so you get to be 'right'.

[leftstreet]

101. You accused DUers of disrespecting troops

Not true

[Posteritatis]

18. A lot of them probably do mean to be, I'd wager.

This place really loves its hyperbole during anything vaguely resembling a war scare, and the more absolute-pacifist (or outright pro-Assad) people would define throwing a single rock as exactly the same as launching into a reenactment of the Battle of Verdun. It's just embarrassing to see. If someone's going to think(sic) like that there's little point in engaging with them in the first place, since it just frustrates anyone who can fit a little nuance into their heads.

[99Forever]

36. You want my r*e*s*p*e*c*t?

Find a way of solving problems that doesn't include killing a whole fucking bunch of people and spending OUR tax dollars doing it, so some 1%ers can cash in YET AGAIN.

Till then, fuck a whole bunch of r*e*s*p*e*c*t.

[truebluegreen]

92. +100

[woo me with science]

102. Thank you. nt

[Cha]

55. They must think they're furthering their cause to

come down like insulting vultures on a Military person who asks for "respect".

[cui bono]

64. That is not true. I don't see disrespect of vets in the posts at all.

There's a difference of opinion of what defines war. Also, the OP was condescending anyway. Just because someone is a vet doesn't give them the right to talk down to civilians and also doesn't give them the right to not have people disagree with them. You don't get respect just because you ask for it. And how does opposing attacking Syria and opposing another war translate into lack of respect for service people?

You can stop with the self righteous "shame on you" bs too. You're not anyone's mother on here. Well maybe you are... but you know what I mean.

[last1standing]

68. He demanded respect but gave none.

Respect is not a one way street.

[HardTimes99]

126. Stop waving the bloody shirt. It's unseemly - nt

[elehhhhna]

159. I can claim to be a vet on the 'net and you cant prove I'm not

What branch is he, anyway? The 101st Chairborne?

[cali]

16. codswallop. Attacking another country with missiles is war

It's patently disrespectful of the people on the ground where those missiles land to deny that it isn't.

You seem to think that only American service people lives are of value. That's disgraceful.

You haven't a clue.

[Tx4obama]

23. No one in The USA was saying we were 'at war' with Libya when Obama intervened over in Libya

I do not understand the outrage over Syria.

Syria will be more like Libya but without the no-fly zone.

[cali]

31. plenty of people were, but one major difference was that Libya was

not unilateral. It was a NATO operation. NATO had full command.

[JI7]

38. so if NATO was used in Syria it would not be war ?

[cali]

49. uh, I was one of the people that was against Libya so your question is silly

yes it was war. yes syria is war, but there is another layer of disgust for me in the syria attack in that the administration is acting unilaterally.

[VanillaRhapsody]

110. So when France helped us in the Revolutionary war...France then declared war on Great Britain?

So to did Haiti then I suppose as Haiti also sent men to fight in "our revolution".

[muriel_volestrangler]

139. Yes, there was a formal state of war between Britain and France (and Spain, for that matter)

Vergennes finally decided in favor of an alliance when news of the British surrender at the Battle of Saratoga reached him in December 1777. Vergennes, having heard rumors of secret British peace offers to Franklin, decided not to wait for Spanish support and offered the United States an official French alliance. On February 6, 1778 Benjamin Franklin, and the other two commissioners, Arthur Lee and Silas Deane, signed a Treaty of Alliance and a Treaty of Amity and Commerce with France. The Treaty of Alliance contained the provisions the U.S. commissioners had originally requested, but also included a clause forbidding either country to make a separate peace with Britain, as well as a secret clause allowing for Spain, or other European powers, to enter into the alliance. Spain officially entered the war on June 21, 1779.
...
With the consent of Vergennes, U.S. commissioners entered negotiations with Britain to end the war, and reached a preliminary agreement in 1782. Franklin informed Vergennes of the agreement and also asked for an additional loan. Vergennes did lodge a complaint on this instance, but also granted the requested loan despite French financial troubles. Vergennes and Franklin successfully presented a united front despite British attempts to drive a wedge between the allies during their separate peace negotiations. The United States, Spain, and France formally ended the war with Britain with the Treaty of Paris in 1783.

http://history.state.gov/milestones/1776-1783/FrenchAlliance

Haiti was still a French colony at that time - the slave rebellion that achieved independence didn't happen until the 1790s.

[MNBrewer]

41. We were also fighting to overthrow Kadaffi

and clearly on the side of the rebels.

In this case will we be seeing to overthrow Assad, fighting on the side of al Quaeda?

[pasto76]

47. thanks for calling my 18 years of service 'not having a clue'

anyone else wanna say there isnt disrespect going on?

but please, tell us all, what exactly is YOUR war experience? dont worry, nobody is going to be holding their breath waiting for you.

continue having a nice life from the safety of your home.

[rug]

83. Well, let's see, you were pretyy dismissive of sailors upthread.

Now you're dismissive of civilians opposing war plans.

You're not making much of a case for respect.

[pkdu]

112. Thank you for your service Pasto76....but don't expect an apology from most on this thread.

Many a such hair on fire , they refuse to recognize basic differences between bootsonground and targeted missile strikes .

It's willful ignorance .

[Douglas Carpenter]

125. exactly could you imagine if American command and control centers on U.S. soil were hit by 100+

high explosive cruise missiles - ANYONE- ANYONE - claiming with a straight face that this was an act of war? They would be laughed off the airways! Like you said it's willful ignorance.

[cali]

140. My experience is protesting wars. No, I don't automatically respect you for serving in

the military. I fail to see why that's deserving of knee jerk "respect".

I don't fucking need to have military experience to have an opinion on syria or any other aspect of foreign policy.

[neverforget]

21. It's just a few missiles

[jessie04]

22. Maybe to save thousands of lives.

[neverforget]

25. How will us firing missiles at Syria save thousands of lives?

Is the civil war suddenly going to end?

[Hydra]

27. We "saved" millions of people in Iraq

By killing them. They never have to pay taxes or live under our dictator anymore.

[HardTimes99]

127. Silly Hydra, don't you understand that we 'liberated' them? (At

least in the Sartrean sensé where libération = death).

[longship]

30. But there's a lot of work to do!!!

We have to throw all the Democrats who don't agree with me on everything under the bus. And I don't care if another Democrat is ever elected again. This is a hair on fire moment and my scalp is singed already.

It's just like all the other issues here at DU for all these years. DU isn't about electing Democrats, it's about validating my opinions.

Arrrrgh! I can barely stand that people here can't see the truth!! I'll make them see it. Watch me! Arrrrrgh!


Just a bit of satire of recent DU flame wars on any number of topics. With good humor intended.

[sendero]

35. More war..

... for the Military Industrial Petrodollar Complex is a litmus test issue for many. After slaughtering 100,000-300,000 innocents in Iraq FOR NO GOOD REASON and all based on a PACK OF LIES you have to wonder if anyone that thinks lobbing a few more missiles is OK is actually sane.

[longship]

48. I don't believe that my post expressed an opinion on war.

So I don't know what you're on about.

Regardless, thanks for your response.

[Denis 11]

87. Very True

I believe that there are many indefensible policies coming from Washington. We meekly accept so many things that are so wrong,(like the ridiculous minimum wage and the suicide rate of the returning vets). The 1% own the whole works.... There is hardly any point in arguing over their decisions, the will of the 1%ers nearly always triumphs. Getting enough politicians together that aren't owned by the oligarchy is impossible. They have mastered herding together enough fools and splintering (us) their opposition, they are a unbeatable machine.

[longship]

89. Well one could do something other than rail at the machine.

Like run for precinct delegate and get progressive friends all over the country to do likewise. We take over the machine one precinct at a time just like the Christian loonies did with the GOP. It'll take some time, but that's what one has to do to break the log jamb.

[MNBrewer]

40. Wow. now that's a unique spin technique I haven't seen yet

Bravo! very creative, I must say.

We're disrespecting the troops by saying "No to war" in Syria.... truly amazing.

[polly7]

44. That was a winner during Iraq.

Not so creative ..... the pro-war fans just need to google up all the RW Iraq talking points. Maybe change the wording up a little and spell better.

[MNBrewer]

56. This was a little different, wasn't it?

At least the OP is going with the idea that there will never be the infamous "boots on the ground".

[polly7]

70. How was it different?

Those of us who opposed bombing and killing innocents in Iraq were told we were disrespecting coalition troops every time we spoke up ....... about anything! I believe the illegal act of imposing war on any sovereign nation is 'disrespecting' all of those civilians who will die, be made homeless, maimed, and will further erode international trust and any hope of real peace in the ME. Protesting against the horror of war and its expected (if we've learned anything at all from the last decade) results for the people of Syria is getting exactly the same responses we got for Iraq.

[MNBrewer]

72. We who opposed the Iraq war were told we didn't respect or support the troops

This person is saying that Obama's war making isn't really war so some how we are disrespecting those same troops by diminishing (somehow) the terrors of "real" war that they went through.

[polly7]

76. Yes, I understood that from the OP.

My comment was merely regarding using the same stupid, fucked up talking points to shame and guilt those of us who oppose it. Not something I expected to see.

[MNBrewer]

78. For certain!

[pasto76]

50. try not using 'war'

'no missile strikes in syria'

'no military intervention in syria'

no? too accurate?

not enough DRAMA!? not amazing enough?

its not a spin. SSG Mark A Lawton didnt die because of some missile strikes. He died and left two babies and a wife because the asshat in the oval office launched a real war.

100,000 and more iraq civilians didnt die in the crossfire because of missile strikes. They died because that fuckstain bush launched a WAR.

YOU dont know what war is. I DO.

[MNBrewer]

61. I imagine the people on the receiving end of our missile strikes would love to trade

war stories with you.

[progressoid]

129. ^^^this^^^

[rug]

84. You realize neither Iraq nor Afghanistan are declared wars, don't you?

[DirkGently]

73. Pretty transparently disingenuous though, eh?

Like our missiles are magically unwarlike. As though "few missiles fired from a ship" BY Syria AT the U.S. would not be viewed was "war."

Sure. You fire some cruise missiles at us. We fire a few at you. Ain't a big deal.

Pure, dishonest propaganda.

[MNBrewer]

74. They only leave behind Freedom Shrapnel.

[DirkGently]

77. And patriot stains?

[MNBrewer]

79. Depends on the stain

if it's collateral damage, then yes "patriot stains". If it's a "bad guy" then it's a "Retributive Justice Stain".

[woo me with science]

88. Or "bug splats."

US drone operators describe casualties as "bug splats."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022015063

[arcane1]

51. Cruise missiles are viewed differently by those who are on the receiving end.

The attacks on 9/11 are considered by many to be an "act of war" and all they had were airplanes. Only 19 people were pulled from their civilian life for that.

Which has more explosive power, a cruise missile or an airliner?

[n2doc]

54. No low you won't sink to

Hiding behind the troops, calling people names. Are you 14 or something?

[cthulu2016]

57. Y'know what? Not calling this shit a 'war' is disrespectful to the

people who will be killed by the missiles strikes you think are so fucking trivial.

[chimpymustgo]

58. Did you enlist yet? And your kids?

[last1standing]

66. I respect your service but that doesn't mean you get to frame the debate.

In fact, using wearing service on your sleeve in order to insult my opinions lessens any respect you deserved.

This post and your exploitation of military service are disgusting.

[arcane1]

86. Indeed!

[polichick]

69. What's disrespectful is the way elected officials serve...

the mic instead of the American people.

And it's disrespectful how those same elected officials treat the men and women who serve as pawns in their games.

[bowens43]

75. wow.that was painfully ridiclous.

If our military is used to kill then it's war.period

[Skittles]

80. are you talking about us or them?

[Nevernose]

91. Well, if it's not war

...then it's simply murder.

You might think it's justifiable or not -- such decisions ultimately aren't up to us -- but when a nation attacks another nation, it's either war or murder.

[mick063]

93. You do not speak for this veteran

Quit acting like you do.

[jimlup]

96. I disagree and here is why:

Your analysis "that cruise missiles are not a war" is in fact most likely correct. It does mean that "enemy targets" will be taken out and real human beings will certainly die as a result - but let's put that human cost aside for the moment.

The nightmare scenario is a real possibility in this case. Maybe it's a 1 in 20 chance or maybe it is a 1 in 100 chance. But consider that "chance":

Syria retaliates by attacking Israel. Israel responds in kind. If Syria uses chemical weapons against Israel that response will be nuclear. Russia backs the Syrian regime and you should be able to follow the war game from there. It isn't pretty.

To assign an actuarial value to this outcome multiply the fractional chance that it will occur by the carnage that could result. Considering this are you sure you want to argue that violence against a nation that we are not at war with isn't war?

I don't think this will happen mind you but I think that people concerned that we are starting a "war" do have a legitimate concern. If we attack Syria it is a major international war crime against a state of unknown psychology. Say what you will but the concerns of war are very real.

[snappyturtle]

153. Thank you. We can sit here and discuss what is war and what isn't

'til the cows come home. I hope people here will start doing
their research into the threats posed by Syria and Iran....if
we attack Syria. Meanwhile, Russia is moving ships into
the eastern Mediterranian...they have a port in Syria. Syria
is threatening Israel. Israelis are buying up gas masks.
Jordan says it won't be a jumping off point yet we left 700
troops, F-16s and missiles after joint exercises at the request
of Jordan. Turkey is saying 'pick me' for launching against Syria.
So if this isn't 'war', per se, there's a lot of warlike behavior
going on none-the-less.

[MzShellG]

98. Agreed. And remember, its the knee jerk reactionist who are always the loudest.....

I'm definitely anti-war by any means, but I'm uninformed on all facts and classified info that the government has at its disposal. Sure we all have war fatigue, but we are in no way more qualified than the POTUS and his top level advisors, to make the best possible decision, under the circumstances.

[LibAsHell]

106. Completely irrelevant

Even if we had 100% ironclad evidence of chemical attacks by Assad and the American gov't shared it all with us, it would STILL be a terrible idea to intervene militarily. Simple as that.

[MzShellG]

111. The administation has been evaluating and gathering intelligence on this situation for a while.....

I doubt that it was a rush to judgment. That's not logical. Pretty sure they weighed all possible options. If they feel military action is the last resort as an effective option then so be it. The decision has apparently been made. We may not like it but at the end of the day, we're just gonna have to deal with it.

[LibAsHell]

115. You can weigh the options, too

I think you give far too much credit to the classified information the administration has, and you greatly demean yourself by acting you're not worthy of challenging the claims.

Let me outline their argument for you, as it stands: "Assad used chemical weapons, therefore we must now bomb him." Yes, that's it. At best, the classified information proves 100% that Assad used the weapons, and that STILL isn't a good enough reason to intervene militarily.

How can this be considered a "last resort"? We are not defending ourselves from an attack. We can exert political pressure and rally the region and Arab League to push for reconciliation. Shooting missiles and bombs on an already war-ravaged country is not a last resort.

John Kerry says he's pretty sure the opposition fighters are mostly moderate, yet we've never seen any evidence. No reason for that to be classified, so where is it? He also said we're not getting involved in the civil war, we're just carrying out surgical strikes on one of the sides. What the fuck? You and I are both capable of seeing what nonsense this is.

Unless they have a crystal ball that says if we don't bomb Syria, the world is going to end, then we should stay the hell out. It's that simple. Dropping a few bombs is not going to do anything except kill civilians and cost money, even if it has the intended result of facilitating the overthrow of Assad, we have no idea what's going to happen after that.

Saying "so be it" is incredibly dismissive. Again, you're acting like you're just some simple-minded peasant, unable to discern what's going on in this scenario. You mistake a lack of a strong case for this action as resulting from you not having access to classified information, when, actually, it's just because there isn't a strong case.

[MzShellG]

117. Youre intitled to your opinion. I can respect that we will just have to disagree....

There's no need for you to attempt to undermine my opinion. A knee jerk reaction to this is not going to solve anything. Do you have a suggestion for a possible non military related response for the administration to consider? If not then the whole debate is a waste of time. I haven't heard any better options suggested by anyone.

[LibAsHell]

148. I feel like shooting missiles and bombs is the knee-jerk reaction

My non-military response would be to continue to exert political pressure, leverage Syria's neighbors, allies, the Arab League, and U.N. to get more involved and push for reconciliation.

After all, if the evidence we have is SO strong, then we shouldn't have a problem convincing Syria's buddies like Russia and China to engage Assad; perhaps even impose sanctions and send a strong message that they can't support him anymore.

Does that really not sound more logical than blowing shit up, especially as Kerry has explicitly stated that we're not getting involved in the civil war, but just trying to reduce Assad's capability in HOPE of the opposition gaining ground and then overthrowing the regime?

We are essentially saying, "we're going to shoot some missiles, then pray it all works out." I don't see how that is defensible.

[MzShellG]

149. Absolutely. That sounds like a pretty logical option....

I don't want war any more than you do. Nor do I want to see chemical bombs dropped on anyone. It will be interesting to see how this military scenario plays out. I'm just hoping for the best.

[morningfog]

103. Using the military to carry out foreign policy is war. When innocents die by our bombs, it is war.

[LibAsHell]

105. Fine, I won't call it a war

I'm still going to say it's a an obvious, huge, fucking mistake that will undoubtedly cost civilian lives, based on, at best, shaky evidence, and we should absolutely not engage Syria militarily in any way, shape or form.

Point is the same.

[nolabels]

133. The deal is that they have already engaged against Syria in a proxy war

Giving any militant arms who will fight against the other side. Now they want to lob a few cruise warheads because they can't give those to the rebels / freedom fighters. The P. R. campaign with the funny gas has gone well for them and a few casualties is always expected no matter what you are doing while making war. Really it's right out of a Karl Rove playbook, find the hardest target and start putting dings into it till you win. PNAC, those goose-steppers haven't missed more than few beats in just about forever

Why are there US troops stationed in Afghanistan? because of the proxy war that was started back in the mid 80's

Proxy war
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_war

[Sand Wind]

108. Kick for some rationality in this debate. Nt

[cherokeeprogressive]

109. I'm a veteran with an Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal. You DON'T speak for me.

Don't even PRETEND to.

And I mean no disrespect.

[ocpagu]

116. Interesting how the Syrian innocent civilians who'll die do not appear in your equation.

Did you forget about them or do they simply don't matter?

[sibelian]

118. What the FUCK?

You're SERIOUS? Presumably my mother growing up in a bomb shelter in London during the blitz wasn't war, then? Because if we say it was you feel slighted?

Here's somethjing you might like to consider, respect, like an apology, or kindness, is freely given or it's worthless. How respected will you actually feel after having coerced it?

[cthulu2016]

120. So your definition of war is increased American divorce rates?

I doubt that people at whom cruise missiles are fired consider American divorce rates to be more definitive of what makes something real war than cruise missile strikes.

[HangOnKids]

124. But But it is the hyperbole that matters! n/t

[Sand Wind]

123. Right a lot of hysteria from the Assad fan base. Nt

[progressoid]

130. Assad fan base?

Who here is a fan of Assad?

[Oakenshield]

136. It's the latest trend by the third wayers around here.

First they accused liberal critics of the Obama administration of being Paulbots, now they accuse of us of being fans of a mass murdering tyrant. I might be offended if not for the fact the accusation is so utterly uninspired.

[ZombieHorde]

131. War is the correct term.

war
noun: war; plural noun: wars
1. a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.

https://www.google.com/search?output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=war+defination&oq=war+defination&gs_l=hp.12..0i10l7j0i22i10i30l3.101.307.1.2040.4.3.0.0.0.0.230.517.0j2j1.3.0...0.0...1c.1.12.hp.1S63RP6hon8&pbx=1&biw=1051&bih=483&cad=cbv&sei=9OImUtjiLOnY2wW-_oC4BQ

Dropping bombs on people or their infrastructure against their will is an armed conflict. You may not like the actual definition of the word "war," but I don't think you should insult people because they are using the word correctly.

[Matariki]

132. Good god you talk like the only lives that matter are American soldiers

[Oakenshield]

137. Wait a minute...

Just hold it right there bub, are you saying you actually have....what are those things called....erm...FEELINGS for foreigners?! You some anti-american type?! You ain't from around here are you? I bet you aint even a US citizen!

[Bonobo]

134. As a human that has had hard times, you have my compassion.

You do not automatically get my respect for joining the military.

You call it service, but my question is "in service of what?"

So yes, compassion. Respect? That is more difficult. It wouldn't be worth much if it was easy, would it?

[B Calm]

135. I'm beginning to see a lot of one issue voters

in DU.

[Th1onein]

138. Let me ask you this:

CAN WE AFFORD THIS? How long is it going to be before we're told that social services have to be cut AGAIN, in order to balance the budget?

We have NO BUSINESS in Syria. NONE. Call it war, call it a surgical strike; call it a dinner party, but that FACT remains.

It's time to take care of our own people. IT'S OUR MONEY, AFTER ALL. OUR TAXES. Why can't we have the benefit of our own damn money?

[bemildred]

141. We have barely begun to be disrespectful about this dishonest crap yet , Sir. nt

[Iggo]

142. Bullshit.

NOT calling it a war is disrespectful to the people who fight it.

[LWolf]

143. What a load of elephant dung.

Dropping bombs is war.

war
wôr
noun
1.
a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.

Having strong convictions is not "hysteria."
Having principles is not "hysteria."
Having a position, and expressing a position, is not hysteria.

hys·te·ri·a
hiˈsterēə,-ˈsti(ə rēə
noun
1.
exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion or excitement, esp. among a group of people.

Being against bombing people is not an insult, nor is it degrading, to soldiers.

non se·qui·tur (nn skw-tr, -tr)
n.
1. An inference or conclusion that does not follow from the premises or evidence.

[Marrah_G]

145. Pasto, a missle strike is an act of war

An act of war that may very well have bad consequences for ourselves and most certainly will have bad consequences for human beings where they land.

If some country fired numerous cruise missiles at our country, would you call it an act of war? Do you think it would quickly escalate into something more?

As for respect? I can be against war without being against soldiers. My brother has served in the ME twice. My son is an airman. My daughter and I have marched against war in DC along side Iraq War vets while my brother was in Iraq.

We won't sit down, we won't shut up, we will continue to try to drown out the drums of war and we really don't care if you call us hysterical. We've been called worse.

[bunnies]

147. Im sorry, but this is like those RWers screaming over the word "marriage".

You feel minimized and degraded because people use a word to describe something you dont feel is equal to your experience.

How sad.

[Demo_Chris]

150. By this standard Germany was not at "war" with England during the Battle of Britain. nt

[Egalitarian Thug]

151. More hysterical than this whiny little missive? n/t