A Case for Not Bombing Syria

[dellinger63]

It would be catastrophic if our bombing Syria led to a theocratic Islamist based government taking over Syria’s cache of nerve agents and other assorted goodies.

Islamists by their very nature are unable to have ambiguous views because they are bound by a fundamentalist perception of their Koran and religious elders. Children are indoctrinated from little on that the Islamist fundamentalist view of the world is correct because it is stated so in the Koran. The Koran tells them to kill all infidels, and who is anyone to argue with the Koran? They are so far gone they issue death threats to artists of comics they don’t agree with. They riot and kill over a video. And most sad is they kill their own for violating the misperceived honor badge that comes with being a good Muslim.

Looking back at the history of Christianity lends us hope. Christians were able to evolve from the days of the Crusades, later burning witches, to the point of where we are today with lone misguided Christians targeting abortion doctors/clinics with the same false perception of it pleasing God. Fortunately for the world, Christians follow a book that does not dictate all non-believers be killed where they lay or we may have been done millenniums ago.

When Morsi of Egypt, (as far as I’ve read, not radicalized) urged his people to "nurse our children" on hatred for Jews, aka "bloodsuckers" and "sons of apes and pigs”, he should have immediately been called out Paula Deen style, only multiplied to the nth degree. Yet our African American President called giving him congratulations. Our government’s consistent response of dismissing such behavior as cultural is akin to accepting Paula using the N word on her show today and tomorrow, because she grew up in the South. We along with our allies need not walk out of UN conferences and give statements to the effect, ‘we expected it’ but rather call them out and remain diligently consistent doing so.

Fundamental, radical Islam feeds off its successes whether it be electing a Muslim President in Egypt or taking down the twin towers in New York. They attribute their triumphs to Allah in a self-fulfilling endless cycle of intolerant and sometimes inhumane behavior.

We and the rest of the world need to do everything possible to prevent further triumphs and successes. To starve their radical proponents and prophesies creating a more humanly receptive Islam, an ambiguous religion accepting people outside of the faith as fellow human beings and not infidels.

If our bombing of Assad leads to another triumph for the radical Islamists, whether real or conceived it would feed armies fighting new made up fatwahs for years and years. We have bigger more dangerous enemies fighting Assad right now, so stay out and let them fight to the death. Allah will decide who lives and who dies. Besides look how much money we'll save.

[Rudeboyelvis]

[Danzig]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...o_nothing.html

I was in a meeting recently in Washington with a whole bunch of important people, when I heard a chilling phrase: Obama had “no good options” in Syria. It’s become a cliché. Aaron David Miller in a CNN commentary said there were “no good options” for dealing with the situation. Michael Tomasky of the Daily Beast wonders if bombing Syria is America’s “best bad option.” This is how Washington talks itself into a war that has little public support and scant basis in facts or logic. It’s completely unclear how much military strikes will weaken Bashar al-Assad’s regime and also completely unclear to what extent a weaker Syrian regime serves American or humanitarian interests. Military engagement has potentially large downsides and essentially no upsides. But we can brush that all under the table with the thought that there are no good options, which makes it OK to endorse some shoddy ones.

Except, in this case, it’s total nonsense. Obama has an excellent option. It’s called “don’t bomb Syria.” Don’t fire cruise missiles at Syria either. Or in any other way conduct acts of war. Condemn Assad’s violations of international humanitarian law. If rebels violate international humanitarian law, condemn them, too.



What makes it a bad option in the eyes of many is the reality that following my advice will lead to the deaths of many Syrian civilians. That is truly and genuinely tragic. On the other hand, it is by no means clear that bombing military institutions will reduce the number of civilian casualties. Historically, military intervention on the side of rebel groups has increased the pace of civilian deaths, not decreased it.

[bigrun]

'Wars begin where you will but they do not end where you please'.
Machiavelli

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by bigrun

'Wars begin where you will but they do not end where you please'.
Machiavelli

i posted that very quote on slate...along with this one:

there are three things necessary to wage war
money, money and yet more money

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Danzig

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pet...roval/Rn0Vk7Fm

I would have signed, but in light of registration required, I don't think so.

BTW what's the difference between registering to sign a WH petition and showing an ID to vote? You can fake identity on the internet?