Syria

[ion]

Thats the beauty of the American political system, the unpinpointableness of everything.

 

There has been quite a bit of propoganda which builds up a national prejudiced towards muslims, and we do and have piled on against them and muslim countries.

 

Even though most of the muslims involved in 9/11 were Saudi, we piled up crap against afghanistan and attacked unjustly, witin the same time period, while America was rallied in hatred towards muslems we attacked Iraq saying it was because Sadam had chemical weapons, we looked but never found them, invaded their country anyway but the never were used on us and stil havn't turned up.

 

These wars have only been possable because America was rallied toward hatred for muslims and there was some blurry reasoning givven to us along with speels about the axis of evil, jihad islam and being told they attacked us.

 

All the while we are also very PC, and like you said, the president and his office can act a certain PC way but thats just them acting. Believe it or not, the presidents act does not express the agenda of the US govt, nor is it a representation of the American peoples media fed and maintained opinion. Its a diplomatic act.

 

We can say muslims are not all bad people, but point out that if they are devout and pious according to their doctrine they are sexist militants who have an insane maniacal ideology that does their thinking for them. Culturaly its ok to say its ok to be muslims, however the majority deal is that those muslim countries are savage barbaric lands where they have been acting the psychopath for years killing eachother; but its ok to be muslim, and it doesn't necessarily make you a bad person.

 

Because we aren't totalitarian, and part of what keeps us calm, complacent and unrebeliouus is our belief system, that we believe in the American dream, and that we are free we dont question the core of our economy or whether we are slaves in a closed system or not, our propganda has to be more elusive then Nazi Germany's was. Our propoganda tactics are to make ourselves believe it is our opinion that we are free individuals who came up with our own free thoughts, views and opinions. We think we make our own biases while our president acts like a geeky white guy whos virtuous and diplomatic, PC and with his wings stretched out to all peoples welcomming them in to coddle them like a hen with its chicks.

 

The danger with you tube is though, you can pick and choose which propoganda your going to subject yourself to, so you get all these manic chicken little types hopped up on opinion and paranoia or whatever, then as a result there is a wave of rationale currently sweeping the nation of not believing in anything negative said about the govt's intentions which is just the extreme of the conspiracy theorist and just as irritational in its shrugging off everything related.

[Urpflanze]

And not to mention that your universities are top-notch and attract the best brains from all over the world.

[runner11]

I'm really starting to think that this is all about the petrodollar. The only thing propping up the dollar is that it is what the world uses to buy oil. I think that's why we need to get rid if Assad and Ahmadinejad. They want to allow the world to buy oil in their own currency. Its like a proxy economic war that is being waged against the US by Middle Eastern Countries, and the only way to fight it is to topple those regimes. Its complicated and its becoming very volatile.

[Urpflanze]

If Middle-East is about petrodollar, what was Vietnam about?

[xor]

If Middle-East is about petrodollar, what was Vietnam about?

 

http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/vietnam/causes.htm

Edited September 9, 2013 by Guest

[3bob]

how much longer the incredibly heavy and gigantic back-log of monstrous evil karma will or can be held back without all hell breaking loose is hard to say, but we will all pay dearly someday - no place is safe except in true spirit.

Edited September 9, 2013 by 3bob

[Aaron]

I agree with everybody. Look at all the troops that died in the intervention in Bosnia to stop the slaughter of innocent civilians there. Sure a million Bosnians died before we intervened, but we lost seven soldiers stopping that conflict. I'm sure we can all agree seven American lives is more valuable that a million foreign lives, especial when the majority of those killed were muslims.... oh wait... I'm sorry I got the impression that some of you seem to think that American lives (or Western) are more valuable than the lives of others. I also get the feeling you have absolutely no idea what "limited air strikes" means. It means we take out their capacity to make chemical weapons and dispatch them. What happens if the shit really hits the fan there and they start launching chemicals on Turkey or Israel? Turkey is a member of NATO remember, but maybe you think they're not as valuable a member as other countries because they're predominantly muslim?

 

So what's the level of genocide we're willing to allow before someone intervenes? 100,000 (we're already there), 250,000 (Syria will probably hit those numbers by next year if they continue to use chemical weapons), or maybe 1,000,000 which is probably how many will die if nothing is done.

 

I think of all the crappy, half-justified wars we've gotten into, this one is probably the least unsavory, yet we're balking as a nation. Why, because despite our professed beliefs, at heart we are a Christian Nation, pushing a Christian agenda. That agenda includes only intervening in the muslim world when they are seen as a threat to us, otherwise it's just not worth it.

 

Aaron

 

edit- Also, if your argument is "we aren't intervening elsewhere" well my argument is that we should be. Is it Taoist? I'm not sure, but I do believe it's the compassionate thing to do.

Edited September 10, 2013 by Aaron

[Aetherous]

oh wait... I'm sorry I got the impression that some of you seem to think that American lives (or Western) are more valuable than the lives of others.

 

Would your brother's life be more valuable than someone you don't know in another country? Not saying that philosophically, one life is more valuable than another for any reason...but practically and naturally, we value our own groups.

 

edit: by the way I haven't really been keeping up with this thread lately so I don't really understand what's being discussed...just wanted to interject with that little idea.

Edited September 10, 2013 by turtle shell

[gendao]

I also get the feeling you have absolutely no idea what "limited air strikes" means. It means we take out their capacity to make chemical weapons and dispatch them. What happens if the shit really hits the fan there and they start launching chemicals on Turkey or Israel?

Lol, who is "they" - the rebels armed by the US whom Iran had allegedly warned had CW a year ago?

Leaked Iranian letter warned US that Syrian rebels have chemical weapons

 

Syrian President Assad's strongest international backer, Iran, said it has warned the US about chemical weapons in rebel hands for more than a year.

 

According to leaked diplomatic correspondence, Iran has been warning Washington since July 2012 that Sunni rebel fighters have acquired chemical weapons, and called on the US to send “an immediate and serious warning” to rebel groups not to use them.

 

In a letter acquired by The Christian Science Monitor that was sent sometime in the spring, Iran told American officials that, as a "supporter" of the rebels, the US would be held responsible for any rebel use of chemical weapons.

 

Iran says that it warned the United States directly, in mid- and late- 2012, and at least once after that, about the risks of chemical weapons among the rebels. The letter acquired by the Monitor references messages from July 18 and Dec. 1, 2012.

 

According to the English translation that accompanies the one-page Persian document, the letter reads: “Alerting [worrying] news has been published about the preparations of insurgent forces in Syria for using chemical weapons/elements."

 

Since the Aug. 21 attack, Iranian officials have repeatedly stated their opposition to chemical weapons use by any side – a policy that has been consistent since Iran was targeted by chemical munitions repeated in the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s.

 

Zarif said in the interview that Iran sent a memo to the US last December stating that “handmade articles of chemical weapons, including sarin gas, are being transferred into Syria.” He added: “In the same note, we warned [Washington] that radical groups might be planning to use these chemical agents.”

 

Zarif said the US never responded to the letter.

So what's the level of genocide we're willing to allow before someone intervenes? 100,000 (we're already there), 250,000 (Syria will probably hit those numbers by next year if they continue to use chemical weapons), or maybe 1,000,000 which is probably how many will die if nothing is done.

LMFAO!!!

 

You do realize that the US ITSELF is the largest genocider of Muslims in the world, having slaughtered 2.5 million over a decade since 2003 and turned their motherlands into toxic Superfund sites by dumping ~400 tons of DU (nuclear weaponz) there???

Ten years after the start of the U.S. invasion in Iraq, doctors in some of the Middle Eastern nation's cities are witnessing an abnormally high number of cases of cancer and birth defects. Scientists suspect the rise is tied to the use of depleted uranium and white phosphorus in military assaults.

So...do you propose the US to intervene against itself now? Or continue its preplanned war campaign to control the entire Middle East?

Edited September 10, 2013 by vortex

[Thunder_Gooch]

We are there now. We can agree to disagree if you like however.

 

Frankly I've studied the subject a bit and don't think we're 1930's Germany.

Edited September 10, 2013 by More_Pie_Guy

[h.uriahr]

Our nation has only gotten more and more worse. California has voted down gay marriage and both times it was over turned. That alone should tell you that voting doesn't matter AT ALL.We have lied outright to get into a war, check out the Gulf of Tonkin.On the bright side our military has gotten better

 

We medicate our problems away. Being a doctor is almost like being a sports player, you get sponsored by big pharma and given incentives to sell their drugs. This nation is corrupt and getting worse. Oh and then the police suck too

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2247514/Graphic-footage-police-officer-fatally-shooting-man-ELEVEN-times-outside-home-released-day-cop-cleared-wrongdoing.html

 

What's unfortunate about it all is that innocent blood will be shed.

[ion]

There are still babies being born with birth defects because of agent orange used in vietnam. We also torture people who have not been tried. That picture of the baby in vortex post is disturbing and I dont dount that things like that are the result of our "liberating" nations and peoples.

 

To answer your question Aaron, I do not believe it is according to Tao to strike in this case or many cases at all. It certainly would be intervening, doing, and interference, and also taking action for the sake of self and thus would be sure to accumulate bad karma for our nation and in this case we wouldn't be certain if we were even attacking the "right" people.

 

When a nation srays from Tao, war horsesare pastured in the commons. The US has been hyper vigilant, ready to strike any middle eastern nation that it can barely rationalize attacking, ever since 9-11; its called maniacal revenge, blind revenge, rage that doesnt care if it even gets the right one, and not according to Tao in essence nor in principle

[Thunder_Gooch]

 

 

Date of speech: June 19, 2012

Edited September 10, 2013 by More_Pie_Guy

[Thunder_Gooch]

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/10/20416189-obama-agrees-to-un-discussion-of-russia-proposal-on-syria-chemical-weapons?lite

 

 

 

Obama agrees to UN discussion of Russia proposal on Syria chemical weapons

 

 

I do not believe this, but I hope that it is true and there is no more conflict with Russia and China over Syria and Iran.

Edited September 10, 2013 by More_Pie_Guy

[zerostao]

[gendao]

Interesting times...when a FAUX NEWS commentator sternly pleads AGAINST WWIII with Syria...while Nobel Peace Prize President OBAMA keep obediently stumping for it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ng_3gMDV13Q

 

[Aaron]

 

 

Hi Vortex,

 

LMFAO! When you can start having a conversation like an adult without belittling other people, maybe then I'll talk to you.

 

In other words, I'm not going to waste my time on someone who's chosen method of discourse is to belittle and laugh at someone else's statements.

 

Aaron

Edited September 11, 2013 by Aaron

[eye_of_the_storm]

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/09/10/323066/un-says-syria-attack-videos-fake-russia/

 

Russia says the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) has confirmed that the videos and photos purporting to show the victims of a chemical attack near the Syrian capital, Damascus, were fabricated.

 

 

The Russian Foreign Ministry said in a Tuesday statement that international experts as well as Syrian public and religious leaders presented their evidence to the 24th session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva on September 9.

 

It also said evidence provided by numerous witnesses confirms that militants fighting against the Syrian government used chemical weapons in the Damascus suburb of western Ghouta last month.

 

The participants in the UN Human Rights Council session warned of the consequences of a military strike against Syria, noting that such an attack would constitute a crude violation of international law.

 

The US administration has been using the footage and the photos in question to lobby for a military strike on Syria.

 

The recent war rhetoric against Syria first gained momentum on August 21, when the militants operating inside the Middle Eastern country and the country’s foreign-backed opposition claimed that over a thousand people had been killed in a government chemical attack on the outskirts of Damascus.

 

The Syrian government categorically rejected the accusation.

 

Nevertheless, a number of Western countries, with the US being at the forefront, quickly started campaigning for war.

 

On August 31, US President Barack Obama said he would seek Congress authorization before the possible strikes on Syria.

 

However, reports indicate a majority of Congress members are either against the planned strikes on Syria or are yet undecided. The Senate has meanwhile postponed a vote on the US administration-proposed resolution to attack Syria.

 

Syria has been gripped by deadly unrest since 2011. The United Nations has reported that more than 100,000 people have been killed and millions displaced due to the violence.

 

MAM/PR/SS

[Aaron]

 

Would your brother's life be more valuable than someone you don't know in another country? Not saying that philosophically, one life is more valuable than another for any reason...but practically and naturally, we value our own groups.

 

edit: by the way I haven't really been keeping up with this thread lately so I don't really understand what's being discussed...just wanted to interject with that little idea.

 

No my brother's life, nor my own life, is more valuable than anyone else's. That's the problem with people, they don't understand that everyone on this planet is sacred, not just themselves. There are so many cases of genocide that we should've been involved in, but instead, because there was no money involved, we just chose to ignore them. Darful comes to mind. Our conviction as a nation is to our own, not to anyone we consider an outsider. Racism is the root cause, but so is spiritual ignorance. In a perfect world there would be no need for intervention, but sadly this world isn't perfect.

 

Aaron

[Thunder_Gooch]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24043751

 

US President Barack Obama has postponed a congressional vote on military action in Syria, vowing to pursue diplomacy to remove the regime's chemical weapons.

 

Let's hope.

[Apech]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24043751

 

 

 

 

 

Let's hope.

 

 

The whole thing was a ploy ... putting it to congress in the first place ... playing to various audiences at home and abroad.

[ion]

I agree Apech, good observation.

Edited September 11, 2013 by ion

[Aetherous]

No my brother's life, nor my own life, is more valuable than anyone else's. That's the problem with people, they don't understand that everyone on this planet is sacred, not just themselves. There are so many cases of genocide that we should've been involved in, but instead, because there was no money involved, we just chose to ignore them. Darful comes to mind. Our conviction as a nation is to our own, not to anyone we consider an outsider. Racism is the root cause, but so is spiritual ignorance. In a perfect world there would be no need for intervention, but sadly this world isn't perfect.

 

Aaron

 

Thanks for the response Aaron.

 

I was pretty much asking how you would really feel, in a real situation where there's a choice between your brother and some complete stranger (lets say who might actually want to kill you or harm many other people). Not hypothetically or philosophically. Not about what's theoretically true. I'm trying to talk real here, which is hard when it's not real and we have to resort to extreme examples. Sometimes it's almost impossible for people to know how they'd really act if something happened.

 

I think that if things got real, we very likely would all favor our own families and selves. And there is nothing wrong with that, in fact it's very right.

 

While I agree that all human life is sacred and one is not better than another, in theory, I also think that it represents a loss of our humanity if we don't have preferences for the people who are close to us. How would your brother feel if he knew that you chose some complete stranger somewhere else in the world to live rather than him, since you felt like it didn't matter at all because each person is equally sacred? Don't you feel like it'd take a kind of monster to choose someone who is not family? There's such a thing as a false and destructive idealism clouding our better judgment.

[voidisyinyang]

http://www.democracynow.org/2013/9/11/chomsky_instead_of_illegal_threat_to

[thelerner]

The whole thing was a ploy ... putting it to congress in the first place ... playing to various audiences at home and abroad.

Yeah, putting it into Congress's hands was the same as sticking it into quick sand. Yet good things might come out of a hanging sword of Damocles. One we're not shooting off cruise missiles that would kill people, destroy stuff and probably not improve the situation. Two, its gotten some motion in the works on diplomatic angles.

 

As far as I see it, the best outcome would be Assad declaring he'd step aside in 4 or 5 months, and free (& relatively honest) general elections would be held. Course even money, that leads to Hezbollah or Brotherhood election, they'd immediately go draconian and spark civil war number 2. So what the hell do I know.

 

Still It might be best to have one side win decisively and have a modicum of peace breaking out then have the bloody civil war drag on year after year, losing 50,000 lives annually.

Edited September 11, 2013 by thelerner