General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThere are people on death row today because "common sense" said they were guilty.
Yet many are innocent.
Shouldn't we demand more than "common sense" before condemning Syrian men, women and children to death?
Squinch
(50,946 posts)I would be all for a surgical strike to prevent future gassing. I am, however, pretty certain that no such thing is possible.
I have been shown nothing that makes me believe that our intervention would actually prevent future chemical weapons use.
I have been shown nothing that makes me believe that a surgical strike that would do any good would not escalate into yet another quagmire, that would ultimately kill more people than the chemical weapons.
I didn't fall for Powell's cartoon drawings of trucks next to quansett huts in Iraq. I'm not falling for anyone's "assurances" for this one. And if we have intelligence that proves that they did what we are saying they did, and we can do what they are saying we can do, surely it is worth bringing a few sources into safety and out of commission in order to gain the support of the American people. If those sources and proofs are not produced, I have no choice but to believe they do not exist.
So, yes. We need more than "common sense."
Th1onein
(8,514 posts)MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)makes them look reasonable and humble, but IMO makes them sound exceptionally arrogant, condescending, and unconvincing.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)last1standing
(11,709 posts)It just feels like it should be true, doesn't it?
How sad that we have a new administration running its foreign policy on this basis.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)that he must be guilty.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)davidn3600
(6,342 posts)We are not supposed to ask questions. We are not supposed to demand evidence. The government doesn't like to be made to prove their opinions.