What is the world waiting on?!

[8timechamps]

People continue to be slaughtered in Syria daily, and there is no sign that the Bashar al-Assad regime has any intentions on stopping. The world continues to issue "strong statements" and sanctions/threats of sanctions.

WTF are we waiting on? By "we", I mean the world (not specifically the US). Syria has been a POS state for years, and still nobody wants to do anything. They must really have incriminating pictures of all the world's leaders...or something.

[Lott's Bandana]

Syria is much more frightening and strategic, with regards to Israel, than Libya was. So the Arab League isn't being very pro-active on this one. Ever since the Bush Doctrine was vilified, "We" the world wants to keep everyone happy that has any remote interest or power in a region.

[soonercruiser]

Syria is much more frightening and strategic, with regards to Israel, than Libya was. So the Arab League isn't being very pro-active on this one. Ever since the Bush Doctrine was vilified, "We" the world wants to keep everyone happy that has any remote interest or power in a region.

Millions have died in African country wars in recent years too.
No one "cares enough to send their very best".
(We only send U.N. "peacekeepers"....after all, those rebels need help raping the women!)
:distress:

[SicEmBaylor]

People continue to be slaughtered in Syria daily, and there is no sign that the Bashar al-Assad regime has any intentions on stopping. The world continues to issue "strong statements" and sanctions/threats of sanctions.

WTF are we waiting on? By "we", I mean the world (not specifically the US). Syria has been a POS state for years, and still nobody wants to do anything. They must really have incriminating pictures of all the world's leaders...or something.

I believe Syria's business is their own. What the rest of the world chooses to do as far as interfering with the domestic policies of a sovereign nation is their business, but I sure as hell hope we don't involve ourselves.

[Midtowner]

Why should we decide which tribe gets to murder the other? There will be sectarian violence regardless of our intervention. We don't have the money to be fighting optional wars halfway across the world where U.S. interests really aren't implicated in any way. We are not the world's policemen (or we shouldn't be). Let Syria handle this or let its neighbors handle it.

[8timechamps]

I believe Syria's business is their own. What the rest of the world chooses to do as far as interfering with the domestic policies of a sovereign nation is their business, but I sure as hell hope we don't involve ourselves.

First, let me be clear that I am NOT saying "we" as the US, I mean "we" as freaking human beings. There is a government in place that is murdering innocent people by the hundreds on a daily basis. Something needs to be done. The Arab League talked a big game, then disappeared. Most of the NATO countries have made very strong statements about how Bashar al-Assad must go...however, that's been "the word" for months. Meanwhile, innocent people are be slaughtered.

At what point does it go past "staying out of their business" and into saving people from being murdered?

[8timechamps]

Why should we decide which tribe gets to murder the other? There will be sectarian violence regardless of our intervention. We don't have the money to be fighting optional wars halfway across the world where U.S. interests really aren't implicated in any way. We are not the world's policemen (or we shouldn't be). Let Syria handle this or let its neighbors handle it.

I tried to clarify in my OP that I was not referring to "we" as the U.S., rather "we" as people (of the world). I realize that there is ongoing violence world wide, but how many governments in state control are actively (daily) slaughtering their citizens?

This really isn't a political thing, as much as a human thing. As for Syria handling this, they are...they continue to murder hundreds of citizens daily.

I don't care who steps in, just don't follow the "we'll wait it out" game.

[8timechamps]

Syria is much more frightening and strategic, with regards to Israel, than Libya was. So the Arab League isn't being very pro-active on this one. Ever since the Bush Doctrine was vilified, "We" the world wants to keep everyone happy that has any remote interest or power in a region.

I know the U.S. wants to stay as far away from this as possible, and I understand why. But, the Arab League is just a self-serving group of windbags. Wouldn't it be great if they actually did something? I am not holding my breath.

[rock on sooner]

Why should we decide which tribe gets to murder the other? There will be sectarian violence regardless of our intervention. We don't have the money to be fighting optional wars halfway across the world where U.S. interests really aren't implicated in any way. We are not the world's policemen (or we shouldn't be). Let Syria handle this or let its neighbors handle it.

Mid, while I agree that we shouldn't be the head cop, the world thinks otherwise.
Truly, we have no choice. I believe that when there are undoubtably "bad" leaders
in this world, there should be an accepted "method" of eliminating them without
fear of a world court trial....not that we should be that "method"...just sayin'. I can
dream up a GREAT TV show or movie on how to go about that....

[8timechamps]

Mid, while I agree that we shouldn't be the head cop, the world thinks otherwise.
Truly, we have no choice. I believe that when there are undoubtably "bad" leaders
in this world, there should be an accepted "method" of eliminating them without
fear of a world court trial....not that we should be that "method"...just sayin'. I can
dream up a GREAT TV show or movie on how to go about that....

I am very much in line with this way of thinking. However, in this case, I'm not even really talking about the U.S., as we are the lead on most of these kinds of issues. It's time for someone (anyone) to step up and end this tragedy.

[soonercruiser]

Why should we decide which tribe gets to murder the other? There will be sectarian violence regardless of our intervention. We don't have the money to be fighting optional wars halfway across the world where U.S. interests really aren't implicated in any way. We are not the world's policemen (or we shouldn't be). Let Syria handle this or let its neighbors handle it.

Just to play devil's advocate....

1. Like Iraq and Afghanistan, we do not go into foreign countries to appoint winners & loosers, like Obama does with his bail outs. Japan, Germany, Italy.....NEVER!

2. Yes there will be sectarian violence.
But...
There "will always be the poor"....so why do we care and try to redistribute wealth...even overseas?
Why do we waste so much $$ on foreign aid? Why not stop all foreign aid?
Why did we go into Libya?
Why should we care if Israel "levels" Iran?

3. Who says that the U.S. shouldn't be the world's policeman.
- The U.N. sure can't do a da** thing!
- Why do you think that the U.S has been so blessed from the very beginning, the Revolution, WWII where we could have easily lost many times; all our natural resources, our thirst for freedom; and our Judeo-Christian heritage???
- No nation on Earth has every been so blessed, so successful, such a high standard of living, and wealth?
If not us, WHO????
"Blessed be the peacekeepers!"

BTW - Clinton said that we would be out of the Balkans in 6 months!
My close friend in the Guard is going over for his 3rd tour there.

[KantoSooner]

'We' the human race, does not exist. There are plenty of folks who are quite pleased with the situation in Syria, namely, the Iranians, Shiites in general and various Lebanese factions. The Chinese and the Russians don't like anything that smacks of extra-sovereign standards of judgement and are also highly aware, unlike those who hated the Iraq war, that the US is having a reformative impact on the Mideast and won't do anything to feed that trend. So, a unified front against Assad, Inc. is not going to happen.

In that case, it's up to us to determine whether action is in our national interest. And there, you have to say, 'no'. They have nothing we want, are a regime that is unfriendly and is unlikely to be friendly under any currently identified faction. So, we are far better off letting them enjoy their own version of Lebanon's civil war.

It's a bull**** country filled with bull**** people. Let them have at it.

[Midtowner]

It's a bull**** country filled with bull**** people. Let them have at it.

Agreed. Let's say that the U.S. leads or participates in another 'coalition of the willing.' Great. Here's what happens--the oppressed radical Sunni majority will swoop in and dispossess the urban elites and likely oppress the Christian and Jewish minorities in Syria. Maybe that's what should happen as the Sunni majority makes up about 70%+ of the population? Who knows? It might be argued that this is basically the cycle of violence in Syria.

Al Assad's father was part of an oppressed Syrian minority, the Alawites, who had been under the thumb of the Sunni majority for over a millennium. There was a rebellion and the tables are now turned.

Let's not mistake a centuries-old blood feud for a righteous democratic uprising. If the Sunnis have their way, the aftermath will look like anything but democracy. So let them butcher each other. It really won't affect the U.S. one way or the other. Until these sects figure out how to exist in harmony, they'll just be taking turns having the upper hand in this centuries-long conflict.

[LiveLaughLove]

If we or any set of countries goes in there, it will be the same as Iraq.

The people get liberated from a tyrant at the expense of "our" troops' lives. The political vacuum will be filled by jihadi's who will incite the people against the liberators.

Why wouldn't they feel gratitude toward the liberators? Because they have this view that Allah is manipulating us to become their liberators. So they are grateful to Allah, but see the liberators as pawns and owe them no such gratitude.

I wasn't ever for invading Iraq. I figured if the Shiites didn't mind getting slaughtered by Hussein enough to revolt, then why should we. I feel the same about this situation.

From a human and Christian perspective I hate hate hate what is going on, but I am not for our or any other western nation going in there and losing a single soldier.

[Curly Bill]

As long as the USofA stays out of it I don't much care what goes in Syria. Sounds kinda flippant and probably harsh, but hey: we got our own problems to deal with, let the Syrians or someone else deal with theirs.

[Chuck Bao]

I do care. Maybe it is because I've spent the majority of my life overseas and seen first hand the injustices and brutality of dictatorial regimes. I was just walking away from the confrontation line on Ratchadamnern Rd. in '93 when the Thai military opened fire on pro-democracy demonstrators.

I can also say with certainty that US State Department disapproval is very influential in Thailand/Thai politics and was a factor in '93 and subsequent political crises since. It was a factor in stopping a full-blown civil war between the yellow shirts and red shirts a few years ago. That is not only because the tourism industry is such a big component of the Thai economy and the incomes of affluent, influential Thais, but also because the Thai people in general want what the US has. They watch the Hollywood movies and are generally sold on the ideals of democracy and freedom. I don't think anyone can make that blanket statement in the Middle East.

I mention all of this just to say that if an indigenous people in a foreign land accept our way of life, our beacon of freedom that the US represents, we have considerable weight.

On the other hand, trying to change cultures, even as reprehensible as those trying to deny women the chance of even elementary education or a requirement that they must appear in public covered from head to toe and accompanied by either their brother or husband or denying them the right to drive a car, are not really attuned to the whole freedom and liberty concept.

As despicable as that is, we can't realistically change them. That has to come from within. Instead of trying to interfere, I really wish that we would concentrate on promoting democracy and freedom where we do have influence. I do not think we should tarnish that beacon through ill-advised wars and an equally ill-advised assault on our freedoms in the name of War on Terror. Our beacon of light just gets a little dimmer.

[8timechamps]

'We' the human race, does not exist. There are plenty of folks who are quite pleased with the situation in Syria, namely, the Iranians, Shiites in general and various Lebanese factions. The Chinese and the Russians don't like anything that smacks of extra-sovereign standards of judgement and are also highly aware, unlike those who hated the Iraq war, that the US is having a reformative impact on the Mideast and won't do anything to feed that trend. So, a unified front against Assad, Inc. is not going to happen.

In that case, it's up to us to determine whether action is in our national interest. And there, you have to say, 'no'. They have nothing we want, are a regime that is unfriendly and is unlikely to be friendly under any currently identified faction. So, we are far better off letting them enjoy their own version of Lebanon's civil war.

It's a bull**** country filled with bull**** people. Let them have at it.

Unfortunately, I think you're right that there really isn't a "we". I don't know where China stands on this whole thing, but Russia isn't so much afraid of the judgement as they are afraid of losing a valuable arms customer. They are the one country Assad would probably listen to, but they are more than likely going to "stay out of it".

As for the U.S. involvement, the only way I would be okay with it would be as part of a unified/international action, and then only in the capacity we supported the Libya campaign. No soldiers in-country.

[8timechamps]

If we or any set of countries goes in there, it will be the same as Iraq.

The people get liberated from a tyrant at the expense of "our" troops' lives. The political vacuum will be filled by jihadi's who will incite the people against the liberators.

Why wouldn't they feel gratitude toward the liberators? Because they have this view that Allah is manipulating us to become their liberators. So they are grateful to Allah, but see the liberators as pawns and owe them no such gratitude.

I wasn't ever for invading Iraq. I figured if the Shiites didn't mind getting slaughtered by Hussein enough to revolt, then why should we. I feel the same about this situation.

From a human and Christian perspective I hate hate hate what is going on, but I am not for our or any other western nation going in there and losing a single soldier.

It's not my political side that wants action, it's my human side. So, I think we're in agreement.

[8timechamps]

I do care. Maybe it is because I've spent the majority of my life overseas and seen first hand the injustices and brutality of dictatorial regimes. I was just walking away from the confrontation line on Ratchadamnern Rd. in '93 when the Thai military opened fire on pro-democracy demonstrators.

I can also say with certainty that US State Department disapproval is very influential in Thailand/Thai politics and was a factor in '93 and subsequent political crises since. It was a factor in stopping a full-blown civil war between the yellow shirts and red shirts a few years ago. That is not only because the tourism industry is such a big component of the Thai economy and the incomes of affluent, influential Thais, but also because the Thai people in general want what the US has. They watch the Hollywood movies and are generally sold on the ideals of democracy and freedom. I don't think anyone can make that blanket statement in the Middle East.

I mention all of this just to say that if an indigenous people in a foreign land accept our way of life, our beacon of freedom that the US represents, we have considerable weight.

On the other hand, trying to change cultures, even as reprehensible as those trying to deny women the chance of even elementary education or a requirement that they must appear in public covered from head to toe and accompanied by either their brother or husband or denying them the right to drive a car, are not really attuned to the whole freedom and liberty concept.

As despicable as that is, we can't realistically change them. That has to come from within. Instead of trying to interfere, I really wish that we would concentrate on promoting democracy and freedom where we do have influence. I do not think we should tarnish that beacon through ill-advised wars and an equally ill-advised assault on our freedoms in the name of War on Terror. Our beacon of light just gets a little dimmer.

Well put Chuck.

I remember rolling through a small village in southern Iraq just hours after the ground operations commenced in the Gulf War. We had stopped the convoy and ended up holding out in this village for a few hours. I was horrified by the condition which the people lived in, and remember thinking how horrible it must be for them. I was younger then (and naive), and an older member of my company must have seen the look on my face. He said "don't get involved, you have no idea what these people view as right/wrong". Looking back, he was talking about my emotional reaction. I realized (much later in life) that our (western) freedom isn't necessarily considered the "right" way of life to many other people. In other words, (and as you put it) a democratic state has to come organically. If they don't truly want it, we don't need to force it on them.

I don't care if Syria remains the dusty, archaic, dictatorship driven country it is now. It just kills me to know kids are being slaughtered as the world watches it happen on TV.

[Chuck Bao]

Well put Chuck.

I remember rolling through a small village in southern Iraq just hours after the ground operations commenced in the Gulf War. We had stopped the convoy and ended up holding out in this village for a few hours. I was horrified by the condition which the people lived in, and remember thinking how horrible it must be for them. I was younger then (and naive), and an older member of my company must have seen the look on my face. He said "don't get involved, you have no idea what these people view as right/wrong". Looking back, he was talking about my emotional reaction. I realized (much later in life) that our (western) freedom isn't necessarily considered the "right" way of life to many other people. In other words, (and as you put it) a democratic state has to come organically. If they don't truly want it, we don't need to force it on them.

I don't care if Syria remains the dusty, archaic, dictatorship driven country it is now. It just kills me to know kids are being slaughtered as the world watches it happen on TV.

Your post really makes me terribly sad, 8timechamps. I'm still not sure what our priorities should be. There should be a tipping point where the US or the UN get involved, but it is really hard to determine that line.

[8timechamps]

Your post really makes me terribly sad, 8timechamps. I'm still not sure what our priorities should be. There should be a tipping point where the US or the UN get involved, but it is really hard to determine that line.

Probably what frustrates me the most is that the world is probably waiting for us to do something. I hate that. I'm not surprised so much in the world's reaction, just disappointed.

[KantoSooner]

I'm just fine with humanitarian aid and helping people out and up. The fact remains that there are many countries where 'our' help and aid is despised, rejected, subverted to the benefit of the ruling clique d'jour and otherwise worthless. Syria is one of those cases.

We want to save kids and feel good about ourselves? Go heavy in Haiti. There's something to work with there AND it's so incredibly non-strategic that no one will question our motives.

Not hard enough to earn vitue points? Go do something helpful in the Philippines. There's a right fine mess that actually has shared history with us.

[sooneriniowa]

Want to feel good and save kids? What about abortions? If its legal in the US then why worry about whats going on overseas?

[rock on sooner]

Well, the fact is that no matter how we feel, the world expects us as "the only
super power" to fix whatever ails the subject du jour. My thoughts are to just
address the crap like in Syria in a "final" way and let the internal forces solve
their own problems. Clearly, when a creep gets in power there is only one way
to get that creep out of power. Is it us, is it some secret group (U.N.? Nah) or
is it the conscience of humanity? Doesn't matter..needs to be done and quickly!

I realize the problems at home, but in absolute reality, we are charged with taking
care of the whole damn world and if we move away from that it is a big problem.

Like it or not, it is in our court. Doesn't matter which "party" is in office...gotta do it!

[KantoSooner]

As to our being pretty much the only effective global actor, yes, I agree. And I absolutely back moves to erase truly dangerous dictators. But Syria? Really? Nothing there that makes a spit's worth of difference. Not worth the time, trouble and money to fix. Slap the sanctions on them, encourage and aid the insurgents covertly and hope that uprising infects Iran.

[Ton Loc]

Want to feel good and save kids? What about abortions? If its legal in the US then why worry about whats going on overseas?

Dummy - keep things on topic.



Either way, why can't the US just come out and say, Sorry, Syria is a f'd up POS, but that's their problem right now; we've got our own crap to deal with.

Also, I've seen enough video games and action movies - where is the super elite ghost squad that isn't connected to any one country at? Shouldn't they have swooped in and took this guy out by now?

[Bourbon St Sooner]

If they are killing each other, they aren't killing us. There's noone worthy of backing over there so let 'em burn.

[jkjsooner]

If they are killing each other, they aren't killing us. There's noone worthy of backing over there so let 'em burn.

That's a good point. Unless occupation is a goal, we have to back someone and take into consideration who we are backing.

I'll say the same thing I said before Iraq. Intervention is a just cause. Whether it's in our best interest is a different debate.

[rock on sooner]

As to our being pretty much the only effective global actor, yes, I agree. And I absolutely back moves to erase truly dangerous dictators. But Syria? Really? Nothing there that makes a spit's worth of difference. Not worth the time, trouble and money to fix. Slap the sanctions on them, encourage and aid the insurgents covertly and hope that uprising infects Iran.

Iran and Syria are the two agitators in the Middle East. Sanctions are REALLY hurting
Iran and that's what needs to happen to Syria so Assad will negotiate his own "exlie".
It really amazes me that people like Assad survive as long as they do.

[KantoSooner]

As much as I despise the Assad family and the current regime in Iran, we need be careful what we wish for. While a Syrian collapse would likely gut Hezbollah and would chasten Hamas and make more likely at least a temporary Israeli/Palestinian peace, it would also un-leash the Saudi and Turkish cultural hegemony machines, both of which are very well funded, and aggressive.
More Wahabbi b.s. would not be a good thing long-term as much as I'd enjoy watching the Shiites catch it in the neck again, as they most surely would.

Oh for a good, old fashioned dictator of the 1960's ilk. Fun loving and pretty much dedicated to spending 3 years or so plundering the country and then off to the Riviera for a contented retirement and some ***-kicking partying.

[soonercruiser]

Want to feel good and save kids? What about abortions? If its legal in the US then why worry about whats going on overseas?

Sorry Ton Loc......it is is on topic...
In that we want to feel empathy for all those who are being killed, imprisoned, etc. in other countries....when we can't even get our arms around protecting the unborn.....the most vulnerable.
Or, worst yet.....vote like Obama......voting to let born (but, unwanted babies) lie on the hospital shelf until neglected until they die.
And worst than worst....now the American excuse is going to be.....OH! The baby is going to be the wrong gender!

This country has a long way to go before it can condemn other countries for how they treat the living..who can protect themselves.

[Ton Loc]

Sorry Ton Loc......it is is on topic...
In that we want to feel empathy for all those who are being killed, imprisoned, etc. in other countries....when we can't even get our arms around protecting the unborn.....the most vulnerable.
Or, worst yet.....vote like Obama......voting to let born (but, unwanted babies) lie on the hospital shelf until neglected until they die.
And worst than worst....now the American excuse is going to be.....OH! The baby is going to be the wrong gender!

This country has a long way to go before it can condemn other countries for how they treat the living..who can protect themselves.

It's a loooonnnngggggggg reach at best...and while far from perfect but we're the best country in the world. We can judge, point fingers, condemn all we want. I know some of you have just one or two drums you love to beat on (Obama, abortion, immigration), but you don't need to drag it into every conversation.

[soonercruiser]

For the moment....it is still a "free country".
Most of you guys "just don't get it"!
Everything that we do is connected.

So, please don't talk selectively about life!