Why we SHOULD demand military action on Syria

Originally posted by wrabbit2000
reply to post by mikegrouchy

 

Well, fair enough on that. When you and I disagree, it seems to be on big, passionate things. However, that doesn't lessen your right to your opinion, every bit as much as I have my right to mine.

Particularly after your reply with reasoning? Well, I still don't agree...lol.. I can't fault a well thought out and logical argument though. Disagree? Of course. My right and prerogative. I can't fault the opinion itself though. You have the right reasons and intentions, IMO.

This is for you Wrabbit2000


Mike

Originally posted by mikegrouchy


Probably wont be believed, but I'll say it anyway.
What you have written is almost exactly how I feel.

The hairs difference, is that I'm committed to finding
out the truth about who was behind the chemical
attacks, in-the-long-term.

I'm not going to change the channel,
I'm not going to move onto the next crisis,
I'm going to pursue this all the way to the end.

Because this is just-a-first-step for me, I am glad
that the military is taking action in my name, it means
they know who their boss is and they are following orders.

Mike

I felt that way about 911. It was the one defining cause of my same "crusade". But what I found out was, that people didnt really care that our governments were using false flags against us the "people" to take away our freedoms at home and empower the police/surveillance state while invading foreign nations to secure 1) natural resources 2) Strategic landmass to build the "oil pipeline", 3) Strategic position versus the Russia/China side of the UN security council. Its straight out of the PNAC documentation. 4) Its Albert Pikes 3rd world war being stirred up and made reality.

Here I am 12 years later and that "crusade" got no where. There was no "justice".

But whats worse is, I found out that some really horrible nasty stuff is done to children all the time, they dont always get the "luck" of a quick death, they are mentally and physically and sexually abused and tortured and many killed after a life of misery, and this is often done by some of the very same people trying to send your fellow countrymen to die, because "some children" have been gassed, what made gas the red line?
As if the deaths of 100,000 people wasnt already a moral enough reason to demand or enforce a ceasefire and diplomacy.

Because the only time people stop killing each other, is when they actually sit down and compromise.
You dont stop people killing people by killing people.
You dont pour petrol onto a fire.
You put the fire out.

To go rushing into a civil war, where no one is actually on your side, is a bit foolhardy no?

Originally posted by OneManArmy

I felt that way about 911. It was the one defining cause of my same "crusade". But what I found out was, that people didnt really care that our goverments were using false flags against us the "people" to take away our freedoms at home and empower the police/surveillance state while invading foreign nations to secure 1) natural resources 2) Strategic landmass to build the "oil pipeline", 3) Strategic position versus the Russia/China side of the UN security council. Its straight out of the PNAC documentation. 4) Its Albert Pikes 3rd world war being stirred up and made reality.

Here I am 12 years later and that "crusade" got no where. There was no "justice".

But whats worse is, I found out that some really horrible nasty stuff is done to children all the time, they dont always get the "luck" of a quick death, they are mentally and physically and sexually abused and tortured and many killed after a life of misery, and this is often done by some of the very same people trying to send your fellow countrymen to die, because "some children" have been gassed, what made gas the red line?
As if the deaths of 100,000 people wasnt already a moral enough reason to demand or enforce a ceasefire and diplomacy.

Because the only time people stop killing each other, is when they actually sit down and compromise.
You dont stop people killing people by killing people.
You dont pour petrol onto a fire.
You put the fire out.

To go rushing into a civil war, where no one is actually on your side, is a bit foolhardy no?

edit on 3-9-2013 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)

There is a lot of strength in that post.

Here is my own humble contribution to the September the eleventh issues
from back in the day.

20-3-2011
ATS: This is what I remember





Meanwhile...
Here is an update on the Refugee camp in Jordan.


Mike

“I used to always cry,” she says.

But now she doesn’t seem to stop smiling as her eyes following the kids running around their tiles laid out on the ground.

“And here I am, I stopped crying," she says.

Displaced but finding new purpose in Jordan's Zaatari camp

reply to post by mikegrouchy


So I guess I did misinterpret your thread. Here I was thinking you were calling for truth, for an investigation and a reality we can believe in. I'll hold my judgement on your purpose as I could easily be wrong again...

Did you just call Peace a 'philosophical question?' Because to me peace isn't a question, it's the alternative to the warmongers. With the might and fortitude of those against the use of WMD, those world leaders who are not reading from the same book, but are quoting similar passages: outrage, humanity, security, compassion. Yet what is the solution from all the camps? Meet grotesque violence with more grotesque violence, or do nothing and let it sort itself out.

Lets be frank, the Aug 21 attack wasn't the first use of WMDs in any war, evidence can be pulled going back to turn of last century and probably further back than that... Poisoned wells anyone? Yet we see our 'leaders' pushing the world towards a massive conflict. A conflict that doesn't take a lot to imagination to see exploding into a world war. The use of chemical weapons isn't the thing that creates this conflict, it's how those with the means deal with that attack that does. The main condition to of any response SHOULD be that it is non-violent.

Violence has ONLY EVER created more enemies, only genocide has brought a measure of stability to any conflict. A violent response to the use of CWs will only galvanize the enemies and allies. Every nation is screaming for a non-violent response with one exception. We've all seen the rhetoric, I'm watching it now as many are. Appeals to the past, appeals to honor and justice, appeals for the children, 'won't someone think of the children!' It's absolutely disgusting how we're all being played. Presented with limited information to galvanize an inaccurate perspective of duty and honor to hide behind as we all allow another massacre to occur.

My fellow Earthicans! Wake the F* up!

We don't know who used the chemical weapons, I've read the unclassified 'intelligence reports' and I invite all to do the same and ask themselves: would such evidence hold any weight in any court of law? I'm no lawyer, but I believe they call that hearsay and it gets dismissed pretty quickly. And considering this is ATS, I also invite you to check the source. Considering the the venom that is spit out by some members when a particular UFO researchers name is the source of a thread purely because said researcher was once, ONCE, caught in a lie, or is proven to be profiting from his material, it's surprising to see the intelligence community is immune to such things. How many lies has the sources of the 'evidence' been caught in? At what point are they no longer trustworthy?

Would you render the death sentence to a man based on hearsay? No matter how horrible that mans actions may have been in the past, his past isn't what's on trial, merely that singular event.

While I agree the world cannot stand by any longer, too long we have watched those with influence abuse that gift. Flout it over those who gave it to them, like the little child who borrows a baseball bat from a friend and then beats that friend half to death with said bat, all the while singing out 'well you shouldn't have lent me the bat.'

So again, I present the idea of a quarantine of Syria. The assets are already there to contain and monitor the movements of both sides, to the extent that neither side would have the opportunity to use such weapons again. If the civil war is truly only in the hands of Assad and the rebels, then a quarantine would snuff out the fighting fairly quickly and impartial truth can be ascertained. The quarantine would be international and across 'party lines.' There is only one line when the people rise towards peace. Those few who prostitute war as a solution will quickly see their big guns mean nothing when you don't have enough ammo.

reply to post by flyingfish

What was being pointed out was the hypocrisy in the US policy when it comes to these kinds of actions.

We can give information to Sadamm Hussein, that allowed for him to create and use chemical weapons during the Iraq/Iran war, yet did nothing to stop him. We can sit back and refuse to call genocide, genocide during the civil war in Rwanda, even though the evidence was very clear.

We can condem North Korea for its development of nuclear weapons, yet do nothing punitive towards both India and Pakastan when they not only develop but actively test such weapons.

So why change the policy now? What is it about Syria that requires the USA attention and move to take action now, when for the past 2 years there has been an active civil war?

And the USA track record when it comes to getting involved in civil wars are not sucesses, but rather failures and those which should state that we should not get involved at all.

The people of the USA are tired, the endless conflicts which never seems to end, with no real end dates or goals is something that is wearing down on its populace.

Then to add more problems into the mix, is that if I was the leader of Syria, I would be working with my allies to make it a gambit that would make the USA and its allies think twice before even striking or doing anything. After all what do you think the Russians would say or do, if their assets or base or even personnel were attacked? If I was the leader of Syria, right now I would be moving military assets around and putting them where it puts say the Russians right in the line of fire. Wouldn't you?

The big issue for me overall with this thread, which no one seems to have noticed, is that it absolutely kills the idea of American democracy. America is war-spent, from the troops to the citizens. We are tired of being the world cop, no one elected us as such. Our government took it upon themselves to become so self-righteous in world affairs, to preserve and protect the almighty dollar. We the people do NOT want this, and it's becoming more and more clear every day.

Now, saying it kills the idea of American democracy is a bold statement, I understand that. The idea of democracy is a civil society ruled by the majority of its peers. Well the majority has spoken in America, and we say NO intervention, however the government pushes forward with it. If you were to ask people on the street, 9/10 if not all 10 will tell you they don't want any US action in Syria. That by no means downplays the severity of the use of chemical weapons, it simply points out that the democratic MAJORITY is against it. Democracy doesn't always work in your favor, but if you truly believe in the idea of democracy, you accept the losses and support the majority decision. You don't have to like it or be in favor of it, but to believe in democracy you must respect it.

Saying we DEMAND action, which already seems pre-determined, and thinking it was us the people that got said action is like telling someone to sit down, while they are already in the process of doing it, and believing they sat because you said so. It's clear that our words and voices mean nothing on the world stage, or congress would give Obama the middle finger, or hell Obama himself would say the people don't want it, so I'm sorry we cannot. Democracy is dead, and our military intervention in Syria will be clear proof of that.

We've dabbled enough in this mess, to absolutely no benefit. Sometimes its best to just wipe your hands clean and step away, however our government seems incapable of doing such, even though the people are screaming for it in the streets.

The use of chemical weapons is bad, really really bad. It's not our responsibility to be the enforcer though. First of all, we don't even know who was behind the use of them, and it's NOT our (the USA) job to investigate and punish it, UNTIL the majority says to do so. So far the government has done the exact opposite, and unfortunately it doesn't seem to be changing anytime soon. When people can finally accept the true terms of democracy, and the fact that your opinions/feelings will not always be the majority, maybe then we can start the process of true democracy.

reply to post by sonnny1


I'm with ya 1000%

The US ought to go back to being full on isolationist, with a vengeance.

Mexican immigration laws and practices make far more sense. As an example of the practices I speak of, I highly recommend NOT getting caught trying to dart across Mexico's southern border with Guatemala. It frequently brings on a fatal case of lead poisoning. If you immigrate there legally, don't even think about applying for welfare or trying to buy real estate.

Pull all our assets back into our own borders and seal them up tight as a drum. No more foreign aid, to anyone. let the world fend for itself for a change. I'm not their daddy (well, not most of them, anyhow). If US corporations want to export their jobs overseas, more power to 'em - but treat them as foreign entities once they do so, and tax and tariff the crap out of what they try to import back into the US to level the playing filed with loyal companies. No breaks or cheap imports to enrich the corporations.

If they don't like it, they can sell their cheap crap in India and China... if they can find the buyers. They ought to be able to - both countries are loaded to the gills with people... POOR people, but buyers all the same, who ought to appreciate a nice cheap trinket. Added bonus: the tariffs could ease the tax burden on citizens.

Work out our own problems, at home, and let the rest of the world alone to do the same, let 'em femd for themselves. they're gonna hate us either way, and a "friend" who can be bought to begin with isn't worth the paper you hand over to him.

Originally posted by nenothtu
I'm not their daddy (well, not most of them, anyhow).

Remind me again not to drink at the keyboard!

reply to post by mikegrouchy


I'm a scout buddy,don't tell me your story of woe,tell me how you would DO it. No plan huh?
That gets my people KILLED.
And in case you haven't noticed our police work on Earth has gained us the animosity of the world partially because of those lies you mentioned.
If you want to make statements you don't do it with cruise missiles.Those are for WAR.
Limited strikes are a waste of time and I don't need to coodle a wayward polititian

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
Since US drew a red line, they have to act. If not, Iran is laughing all the way to nuclear weapons.

Note #1: people who stupidly misspeak and throw their weight around without justification very often acquire egg all over their faces. It's a fact of nature. Let it happen - that's how idiots learn not to speak out of turn.

Note# 2: Who gives a crap if Iran lines their basements with nukes, and WHY would anyone give a crap? It's Iranians that would be glowing in the dark over it, so that would be THEIR problem to fix, not mine. Leave 'em alone to learn that lesson by themselves if they want to. The US has nukes, Russia has nukes, India, Pakistan, and a whole lot of other countries have nukes, so why shouldn't Iran?

Originally posted by mikegrouchy
Are you guys done with your parade of failures
or does someone else wish to be an authority on what can't be done?

In one hundred years,
no one is going to come here and cite a single one of the negative posts,

It will only be known that
when it really mattered,
you failed to demand action.

That the discussion was full of criticism,
conflation, obfustication, inverted logic,
and an overwhelming lack of useful solutions.

Mike

edit on 3-9-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)

Failing to demand the actions YOU insist upon does not equate to failing to demand action. My demand is to actively pull back into the US and allow the rest of the world to go off the rails if that is THEIR choice.

Non-intervention ANYWHERE in the world is MY solution. Let them eat themselves.

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by mikegrouchy
Are you guys done with your parade of failures
or does someone else wish to be an authority on what can't be done?

In one hundred years,
no one is going to come here and cite a single one of the negative posts,

It will only be known that
when it really mattered,
you failed to demand action.

That the discussion was full of criticism,
conflation, obfustication, inverted logic,
and an overwhelming lack of useful solutions.

Mike

edit on 3-9-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)

Failing to demand the actions YOU insist upon does not equate to failing to demand action. My demand is to actively pull back into the US and allow the rest of the world to go off the rails if that is THEIR choice.

Non-intervention ANYWHERE in the world is MY solution. Let them eat themselves.

You, sir, are littering the Internet with Common Sense and Logic! There is no place in the world for such sense!

And I agree with you completely.

I care.


Mike

In this video it is reported that Berlin Intelligence
states they have an intercepted telephone call
between one head Hezbollah official and the
Iranian Embassy says that "Assad lost his
nerve and ordered the attack."

But then at the end of the video (RT is a
Russian News agency) they interview a
German who says that it doesn't matter
anyway, because the American people
don't believe their own leaders.


That's not entirely true. I'm an American,
and I have been a Conspiracy Theorist
for 20 years, a Conspiracy Realist for the
last 8, and in-this-one-case, I believe our
leadership, and that we should demand
action.


Mike

Originally posted by mikegrouchy

Historical Fact
U.S. Fires 13 Cruise Missiles at Serbian Targets in Bosnia : Balkans: Weapons launched from ship in Adriatic are aimed at antiaircraft installations that have menaced NATO warplanes. There are many casualties, rebels say.

latimes/ 1995 -09 -11/ news / cruise missiles
September 11, 1995




The back story
In Adam Curtis' documetary Series "The Century of the Self" (4 hours runtime)
he stated that President Clinton had a phone bank that was polling Americans,
and the decision to bomb Bosnia was made by the [color=gold] feelings of people
living in Colorado.

Clinton didn't ask for a vote,
he didn't ask for a conscious decision by the public.
No.

It's not so much the people that are in charge, as it's their feelings

-Century of the Self

So, because Clinton unjustifiedly kicked someone's barstool out from under them, without cause, we should continue that tradition? Bosnia was a cluster#. Does Obama need his OWN cluster# now? I mean, ANOTHER one?

But President Obama _has_ asked for a vote.

Oh my! And he's planning a week long propaganda blitz this entire week to sway public opinion and somehow justify re-arranging someone else's country before the vote! Nice plan there. That's why I'm here - to counter the propaganda blitz intended to get my country involved in yet another useless Chinese Fire Drill.

If someone offers us the sword,
hilt first,
we should take it!

Least everything slips back into polling and rule by emotional manipulation.

I've grasped that sword, and swung it. From the mud, not from a turkey shoot managed from a nice warm bunk. I've never done so, however, without weighing the options, evaluating the likely outcomes and other possibilities of the unintended consequences. In short, I've never done it unless to counter a threat to my own. Syria is no threat to my own as it stands. If the "rebels" win, however, that will all change. Some of those "unintended consequences" I mentioned. I question whether they are really "unintended", though.

This week's propaganda blitz IS an attempt to rule by emotional manipulation. That's sort of the whole idea behind propaganda.

youtube / century of the self clip
^Who want's to go back to that?

I dunno. Can't say. I can't be assed to watch a four hour video over this half-assed internet connection I have at the moment. Just say plainly what you take from the video, and we can go from there. Sum it up.

And the cause! What a cause. The use of
chemical weapons. My brother said "I would
rather be wrong militarily than be involved
with anything like that"

Clean up your own house first. Demand an end to chemical weapons use within the US first. THEN you may have some standing to ask nicely for someone else to clean up THEIR house. Until then, not so much.

MY brother said "Choke, choke, cough, gasp! Sons of bitches threw teargas at us for speaking our minds! What has happened to the country I fought for?"

Demand Action.

I have.

Bring an end to the era of secret wars.

Wars are wars, secret or public. They are always going to be, as long as one guy insists on telling another guy what to do. Stop that cycle - stop telling other folks how to run their own countries. You don't fight fire with fire - you fight fire with WATER. Heaping MORE war onto an already burning war just makes it hotter.

Consciously and with purpose take up the
sword. Or remain in a floating bottomless
world blown about by the wind, always
running from one crisis to the next.

OR - simply stop flitting amongst the crises. let them handle themselves, and go fishing instead. Not MY crisis to deal with. That would be the SYRIANS problem.

Nothing, will be as important in 100 years
as the Use of Chemical Weapons in an attack
not even the twin towers.

Baloney.

And with that I leave the decision up to
the readers. Remain a sheep in the care
of evil manipulative handlers, or demand
action.

Now, THAT I can agree with. Our main difference is in the manipulators we recognize. I see the government propaganda blitz as naked manipulation to get us into yet another useless war.

See, it's not that we order our sons and daughters
serving in the military into harms way that upsets
them. It's when we do it half assed. When we
send them to the desert and then change the
channel, forgetting they are there.

So the answer is to send them into yet ANOTHER desert and leave them sitting there? Great plan.

That is the result of being manipulated into these
kinds of decisions.

Again, agreed. Neither I nor my house will be manipulated into agreeing with this bone-headed action via the propaganda blitz. WE won't be sitting in your desert.

No! Take up the cause,
with purpose,
with intent,
and do not let go!!!!

Mike

You betcha. I have and will. Like a bulldog. Just not YOUR cause. Mine is for the American people, and always has been.

I wouldn't know about that,
as I don't watch TV, maybe
there is some kind of blitz.

But from reading ATS the
impression I get is that the
blitz and propaganda is
all against demanding
action to stop the use of
chemical weapons.

Almost like someone
wants us to give up our
moral authority.

I mean have you ever
heard of Rand Paul, AND
Rush Limbaugh being on
the same side of an issue?


But taking your advice, I
have youtubed up some
TV to see what people
are saying. Here it is.



If this is all they have then
I think that you protest too
much.

It is amazing to me what
a self reinforcing echo
chamber of hysteria ATS
has become over this.

You guys had the chance
to lead on this issue, and
instead are retreating to
the old "everyone is a liar
I don't trust nobody!"


Mike

Originally posted by mikegrouchy
I wouldn't know about that,
as I don't watch TV, maybe
there is some kind of blitz.

They don't usually announce "stay tuned for a propaganda blitz, and pop some popcorn" they just do it, and leave it to you to figure out that's what's going on. In the middle of the night Sunday night, apparently commentator after commentator stepped up and said "we need to educate the American people before this vote". Translated, that means "we have to blast the American people with propaganda in order to sway their opinions and get them to agree with what we are hell-bent on doing anyhow". Voila! Come Monday morning news shows, the blitzing started.

That's a clear enough announcement of a propaganda blitz to me, complete with the rationale for propagandizing us.

But from reading ATS the
impression I get is that the
blitz and propaganda is
all against demanding
action to stop the use of
chemical weapons.

I demand we stop using them here first. Set a proper example of how NOT to assault your own citizenry, and do it at home first.

Almost like someone
wants us to give up our
moral authority.

We have no "moral authority" to tell someone else how to run their own country when we can't even run ours in the way we demand they run theirs. Get that moral authority first - can't give up what you've not got to give up.

I mean have you ever
heard of Rand Paul, AND
Rush Limbaugh being on
the same side of an issue?

Can't say that I have, since I don't listen to either one of them. From what I've been able to gather, Limbaugh is a neocon, which makes him a "coded pinko". He's a leftist from where I stand. Don't know about Paul.

But taking your advice, I
have youtubed up some
TV to see what people
are saying. Here it is.

If this is all they have then
I think that you protest too
much.

Don't know what's in your video. A summary would be nice. Since I don't know what's in it, I don't know if "that's all they have". My arguments are based upon the logic I have presented myself - not something in a YouTube video. That's what I have. Don't know what "they" have.

It is amazing to me what
a self reinforcing echo
chamber of hysteria ATS
has become over this.

You guys had the chance
to lead on this issue, and
instead are retreating to
the old "everyone is a liar
I don't trust nobody!"

Mike

Again, don't make the mistake of thinking that simply because I am not leading YOUR charge on this "issue", that I am retreating. It's not an either/or proposal.

I'm taking a lead.

Just not yours.

This isn't about me.


Mike

reply to post by mikegrouchy


It isn't about the Syrian people, either... or the American people, for that matter.

It appears to be about trying to sway people to carry the water for yet another useless military poke into someone else's business.

Originally posted by nenothtu

It appears to be about trying to sway people to carry the water for yet another useless military poke into someone else's business.

I have hope that We The People, will
demand Military action in Syria. I have
spent 12 pages of this thread explain-
ing that I do not mean vague, bomb
dropping action, but that We The
People demand specific action to

Get evidence of the attack
have it put into the possession of the public
track it's history down to where the components were mined
and then start handing out indictments, or take reprisals

The motive presented is that in the
history of the World Chemical Weapons
are a whole category unto themselves.

That as a movement of Conspiracy
thinkers, this is our moment.

And that everything else up-till-now
has been practice for this most
important chance to take control
of both the dialog, and direction
of the country.



And here we are on almost page 20
and from reading the quote above, I
find that I am being forced to defend
a "military poke into someone elses
business" which is a gross miss-
characterization of both the intent,
discussion, and purpose of this
thread.



Mike