posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 03:46 PM
The US president wants to go to war over the use of Sarin gas in Syria due to it being a banned, inhumane, chemical weapon. Unless they start lethal
injecting people, all weapons of war are inhumane, some more so than others.
Case in point, napalm and white phosphorus, which the US and others have used extensively. Napalm and white phosphorus are chemical weapons that are
banned against targeting civilians for the same reason sarin is, namely, an incredibly horrific, inhumane way to die.
So my question to you is, "Given a choice, how would you rather die?" Its a morbid but important question. My point is that, in my opinion, Sarin is
a more humane weapon than the other two, and therefore, not a reason to go to war. You may say, "But Sarin is an invisible gas and he's targetting
his own civilian population." True but when Assad is bombing his people at night, thats ok? No one see's those bombs coming, and they are just as
indiscriminate. The effects of bombing is all over the net for anyone with the stomach and desire to witness. The poor sarin victims dont look any
Sarin gas effects on people:
"Napalm is the most terrible pain you can imagine," said Kim Phúc, a napalm bombing survivor known from a famous Vietnam War photograph
White Phosphorus doesn't stop burning until the substance burns itself up or is deprived of oxygen.
edit on 4-9-2013 by NOrrTH
because: (no reason given)