3 ms·

Anyone else think they're doing the same now with the "gas attack" in Syria? I don't really claim to understand how a dictator thinks under pressure of civil wa

by devx 13y ago

Anyone else think they're doing the same now with the "gas attack" in Syria? I don't really claim to understand how a dictator thinks under pressure of civil war, but the guy seemed relatively intelligent and educated. He'd probably know better than to do such an attack, when US and others were looking for any excuse to enter the war. The situation really is terrible for everyone there, but I'm not sure an US intervention would make things better, and I especially don't trust US propaganda anymore. I'm way over the "spreading democracy" phase.

jlgreco 13y ago
At this point, there isn't any way to say for sure. The only thing about that situation that seems clear is that the situation is a clusterfuck and that nothing is clear. We should want nothing to do with that situation and indeed it seems most Americans don't want anything to do with that situation (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-syria-crisis-usa-poll-idUSBRE97O00E20130825 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-syria-crisis-us...). Unfortunately the possibility remains that Americans already do have something to do with the situation, whether that is what the people desire or not.
speeder 13y ago
Although even accident cannot be ruled out (the situation is just confusing and crazy), it would not surprise me if the attack was backed (even if indirectly) by US or Israel. It would surprise me even less if it was someone else, and US knew and did nothing to prevent it on purpose (like the story on the article, or the one about OWS people being targeted by snipers and FBI ignoring the snipers on purpose).
rdtsc 13y ago
Still hard to say. Objectively, given that neither side actually cares for taking innocent human lives, the ones most likely to profit from this are the rebels. Obama's "line in the sand" speech coupled with the timing of UN inspectors on the ground should make one think twice before jumping to default conclusion. I don't care for one side or the other, it is just a big mess anyway it seems. The reason I kind of follow is that I am afraid somehow US is going to get involved in it, which, now seems more likely.
znowi 13y ago
> The situation really is terrible for everyone there, but I'm not sure an US intervention would make things better The havoc that unfolds in the Middle East is the US intervention. Instability in the region fuels the War on Terror. There's little concern for the locals who are mere pawns in the US game. Afghans and Iraqis already know that. Others, like Egyptians, are starting to realize this.

by devx 13y ago

jlgreco 13y ago

At this point, there isn't any way to say for sure. The only thing about that situation that seems clear is that the situation is a clusterfuck and that nothing is clear. We should want nothing to do with that situation and indeed it seems most Americans don't want anything to do with that situation (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-syria-crisis-usa-poll-idUSBRE97O00E20130825 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-syria-crisis-us...). Unfortunately the possibility remains that Americans already do have something to do with the situation, whether that is what the people desire or not.

speeder 13y ago

Although even accident cannot be ruled out (the situation is just confusing and crazy), it would not surprise me if the attack was backed (even if indirectly) by US or Israel. It would surprise me even less if it was someone else, and US knew and did nothing to prevent it on purpose (like the story on the article, or the one about OWS people being targeted by snipers and FBI ignoring the snipers on purpose).

rdtsc 13y ago

Still hard to say. Objectively, given that neither side actually cares for taking innocent human lives, the ones most likely to profit from this are the rebels. Obama's "line in the sand" speech coupled with the timing of UN inspectors on the ground should make one think twice before jumping to default conclusion. I don't care for one side or the other, it is just a big mess anyway it seems. The reason I kind of follow is that I am afraid somehow US is going to get involved in it, which, now seems more likely.

znowi 13y ago

> The situation really is terrible for everyone there, but I'm not sure an US intervention would make things better The havoc that unfolds in the Middle East is the US intervention. Instability in the region fuels the War on Terror. There's little concern for the locals who are mere pawns in the US game. Afghans and Iraqis already know that. Others, like Egyptians, are starting to realize this.