Syria Gearing Up

[eynon81]

[WizardfromOz]

[J.K. Gregg]

I question the premise that standing by while Syria uses chemical weapons against its people implies tolerance and thus proliferation. I think it implies that the U.S. will act only in certain situations (i.e. when its interests are threatened).

[eynon81]

[WizardfromOz]

[The Comrade]

[eynon81]

[J.K. Gregg]

I understand the threat of rouge nations getting and using chemical weapons. But each threat has context. Chemical weapons in the hands of Iran or Zimbabwe are a lot different than chemical weapons in the hands of Australia. If it can be objectively determined that such chemical weapons could be sold to terrorists or put into a long-range weapon, then yeah, I'm all for sending in the F-15s.

Context, context, context. In the one here in Syria, I don't see how it would harm our interests. Assad wants to kill the Syrians that want him out of power, not all infidels (i.e. Americans). But the moment the context changes, I'll be much more receptive to getting involved. The standard for me is the self-interest of my country. That’s why I pay taxes that pay for a military.

[J.K. Gregg]

[exploited]