Author Topic: Syrian Civil War  (Read 7823 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline m52nickerson

  • Polish Viking
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1386
  • Gender: Male
  • Winning by flying omoplata!
Re: Syrian Civil War
« Reply #30 on: June 18, 2012, 11:07:14 am »
If the UN does, I'd like to see most of the outside force be provided by other countries instead of the US being the up front nation

I agree.  Libya was a great example were other NATO countries provided the firepower and preformed most of the airstrikes while the US played a support role.
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. ~Macbeth

Offline Sylvana

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1016
  • Gender: Female
Re: Syrian Civil War
« Reply #31 on: June 19, 2012, 03:49:28 am »
If the UN does, I'd like to see most of the outside force be provided by other countries instead of the US being the up front nation

I agree.  Libya was a great example were other NATO countries provided the firepower and preformed most of the airstrikes while the US played a support role.

I agree as well.
Although I think one of the main reasons that the US seems to always provide the bulk of the troops is that they are a permanent member of the security council while most other nations like my own are not. However, I believe that the other permanent members should also be providing an equal amount of resources as is their duty and responsibility.

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: Syrian Civil War
« Reply #32 on: June 19, 2012, 04:20:24 am »
One pilot is worth the lives of 10,000 Syrians?

I find that ironic. The guy that hates the US playing world police is now getting upset because the US doesn't want to play world police

I'm not saying I agree with intervention. I'm saying Art's argument against it is amoral and idiotic.
I don't see it as idiotic at all. One of our guys dies in a war for some asshole leader to take power from another asshole leader, I find that unacceptable.
Syria wants a new asshole to lead them, let them do it themselves. It'd be like your country loosing someone to help people in the US toss Dubya and put Cheney in charge.

I don't think it is acceptable to argue that a single American life is worth more than a few thousand or tens of thousands of Syrians.
It is when the reason that person dies is to put another dictator in charge that's no different than the one before. It's a waste. Both that one person and those thousands of Syrians

A person might argue that intervention reduces the ultimate death toll by giving one side a crushing advantage, allowing them to win with comparatively few casualties on either side. This might prevent the kind of bloody stalemate we're seeing in Syria right now. Even if the numbers were very small- say a dozen fewer people killed, or even two fewer people killed- that reduction in casualties is worth a single American life, all other things being equal.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Art Vandelay

  • Guest
Re: Syrian Civil War
« Reply #33 on: June 19, 2012, 04:22:07 am »
A person might argue that intervention reduces the ultimate death toll by giving one side a crushing advantage, allowing them to win with comparatively few casualties on either side. This might prevent the kind of bloody stalemate we're seeing in Syria right now. Even if the numbers were very small- say a dozen fewer people killed, or even two fewer people killed- that reduction in casualties is worth a single American life, all other things being equal.
It's not if you're an American.

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: Syrian Civil War
« Reply #34 on: June 19, 2012, 07:58:22 am »
A person might argue that intervention reduces the ultimate death toll by giving one side a crushing advantage, allowing them to win with comparatively few casualties on either side. This might prevent the kind of bloody stalemate we're seeing in Syria right now. Even if the numbers were very small- say a dozen fewer people killed, or even two fewer people killed- that reduction in casualties is worth a single American life, all other things being equal.
It's not if you're an American.

I'd find that extremely insulting if I were American.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Art Vandelay

  • Guest
Re: Syrian Civil War
« Reply #35 on: June 19, 2012, 10:45:47 am »
I'd find that extremely insulting if I were American.
I just hope you're never put in any governmental or military position of power, if that's your attitude towards the people you'd actually have a responsibility to protect.

Offline Her3tiK

  • Suffers in Sanity
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1940
  • Gender: Male
  • Learn to Swim
    • HeretiK Productions
Re: Syrian Civil War
« Reply #36 on: June 19, 2012, 11:31:22 am »
I'm probably going to regret saying this, but from a purely analytic standpoint, Lt. Fred has a point. The trade of one American life for even a few dozen others (and that's assuming only those who die, not those who are maimed and continue living) is a light trade to the end of a bloody conflict. Is the country that soldier serves going to be thrilled? Probably not. Will the families of those rebels and soldiers who don't die be grateful? Maybe not directly, but I'll be damned if they don't realize one some level what a quick end to the war saves them in terms of loss and suffering.

Regardless of what I've said here, I still think it's best that Syria solves its own problems. Extranational intervention doesn't tend to be temporary, and nearly all modern nations have had to deal with this kind of violent revolution to get where they are today. Syria's reached that tipping point, and both needs and deserves to handle this on its own.
Her3tik, you have groupies.
Ego: +5

There are a number of ways, though my favourite is simply to take them by surprise. They're just walking down the street, minding their own business when suddenly, WHACK! Penis to the face.

Offline DasFuchs

  • God
  • *****
  • Posts: 521
  • Gender: Male
  • Ruler of his own little world since 1977
Re: Syrian Civil War
« Reply #37 on: June 19, 2012, 10:45:55 pm »
One pilot is worth the lives of 10,000 Syrians?

I find that ironic. The guy that hates the US playing world police is now getting upset because the US doesn't want to play world police

I'm not saying I agree with intervention. I'm saying Art's argument against it is amoral and idiotic.
I don't see it as idiotic at all. One of our guys dies in a war for some asshole leader to take power from another asshole leader, I find that unacceptable.
Syria wants a new asshole to lead them, let them do it themselves. It'd be like your country loosing someone to help people in the US toss Dubya and put Cheney in charge.

I don't think it is acceptable to argue that a single American life is worth more than a few thousand or tens of thousands of Syrians.
It is when the reason that person dies is to put another dictator in charge that's no different than the one before. It's a waste. Both that one person and those thousands of Syrians

A person might argue that intervention reduces the ultimate death toll by giving one side a crushing advantage, allowing them to win with comparatively few casualties on either side. This might prevent the kind of bloody stalemate we're seeing in Syria right now. Even if the numbers were very small- say a dozen fewer people killed, or even two fewer people killed- that reduction in casualties is worth a single American life, all other things being equal.

If that's all it takes, why doesn't Australia send their soldiers to fight?
I still say you have a hell of a double standard. "the US is playing world police, that's bad" "The uS won't play world police, that's bad"
Send your guys in if you're so gung ho to give one side leverage to win.
"To a New Yorker like you, a hero is some type of weird sandwich. Not some nut that takes on two Tigers!" "You gotta hit'em point blank in the ass!" Oddball