General Discussion

jeff47

(26,549 posts)

58. The difference is a few shells just killed 1500 in Syria

Fri Aug 30, 2013, 02:45 PM

Aug 2013

whereas White Phosphorus, and other non-WMDs, can't kill nearly as many per weapon.

The reason to strike is not because we're saints. The reason to strike is if Assad does not suffer any damage from using chemical weapons, there is no reason to avoid using them again.

Assad has not used chemical weapons yet out of fear of a retaliatory strike. If that strike does not happen, there is no reason to keep sitting on his chemical weapon stockpile. He could end the civil war tomorrow by slaughtering a few million in one night's attack. His alternative, staying with conventional weapons, has a good chance of causing him to swing from a lamppost at the end of this civil war.

We need Assad to put the chemical weapon genie back in the bottle before he uses them to save his own life. Our least-bad option for doing that is some airstrikes.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

63 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Re: Syria. Look at it this way. [View all] Pab Sungenis Aug 2013 OP

Well said. morningfog Aug 2013 #1

I agree that this is not our war LiberalEsto Aug 2013 #2

Someone already got a free pass. Pab Sungenis Aug 2013 #3

I hope to never be as callous as you. (nt) jeff47 Aug 2013 #4

Not callous, practical! atreides1 Aug 2013 #11

And when Assad gasses an entire rebel city? jeff47 Aug 2013 #16

Missed the battle of Stalingrad, did you? AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #35

And your position is less callous? Vinnie From Indy Aug 2013 #12

Yep jeff47 Aug 2013 #19

How many Americans and Syrians are you willing to have killed to "punish" Assad? Vinnie From Indy Aug 2013 #22

A better phrasing is how many should die to prevent Assad from killing millions jeff47 Aug 2013 #25

So you and Assad communicate regularly? Vinnie From Indy Aug 2013 #27

I think everybody here KNOWS the answer to that question. bvar22 Aug 2013 #62

How often do you contact Washington to oppose our use of landmines and refusal to join Bluenorthwest Aug 2013 #14

K, let's add up all the people killed by the methods you deplore. jeff47 Aug 2013 #20

We've gone from an, as of yet, unsubstantiated report to worst case scenario speculation whatchamacallit Aug 2013 #23

Why wouldn't he? jeff47 Aug 2013 #26

These assumption have been made and acted on before whatchamacallit Aug 2013 #48

No, in those cases the dictator in question did not actually have the weapons jeff47 Aug 2013 #59

do YOU know who used the chemical weapons? MNBrewer Aug 2013 #28

Hell, he got a free pass for using them against another country NuclearDem Aug 2013 #38

I think he also used them against the Iranians in the Iran-Iraq war fujiyama Aug 2013 #61

Landmines, Clusterbombs and Depleted Uranium are banned by international treaties Arctic Dave Aug 2013 #6

And there should have been serious consequences for those. LiberalEsto Aug 2013 #9

That's because use of chemical weapons usually gets a "forceful" response jeff47 Aug 2013 #21

He could also do it by encircling it with landmines and then Arctic Dave Aug 2013 #36

You realize that you are using the "we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud" argument Maedhros Aug 2013 #43

The difference is Assad actually has the weapons in question. (nt) jeff47 Aug 2013 #53

But you're saying "If we don't attack, Assad will use them again!" Maedhros Aug 2013 #55

So it's OK for his government to use chemical weapons if he's lost control jeff47 Aug 2013 #57

And when that red line is crossed by us? progressoid Aug 2013 #51

White Phosporus isn't a chemcial weapon. It's an incendiary weapon. jeff47 Aug 2013 #54

I'm pretty sure the people maimed and killed by white phosporus don't care about that distinction. progressoid Aug 2013 #56

The difference is a few shells just killed 1500 in Syria jeff47 Aug 2013 #58

Over 100,000 people have been killed in this civil war by a myriad means of destruction. progressoid Aug 2013 #60

"I do hope the UN will come up with a way to tackle this war crime" My sentiments as well! Rebellious Republican Aug 2013 #37

We used white phosphorus in Iraq. Who should stop us? grahamhgreen Aug 2013 #39

In my post # 9 I said there should have been serious consequences for the US LiberalEsto Aug 2013 #45

Your first three paragraphs made a good case for intervention michigandem58 Aug 2013 #5

The first three paragraphs were an accurate description of our civil war Pab Sungenis Aug 2013 #7

So Assad is like Lincoln? michigandem58 Aug 2013 #29

I wouldn't call the OP a "comparison" markpkessinger Aug 2013 #33

Coming from you that has to be the height of irony. Arctic Dave Aug 2013 #8

Pab should post this on PeoplesView Capt. Obvious Aug 2013 #17

Well done, well done. Autumn Aug 2013 #10

K&R Vinnie From Indy Aug 2013 #13

But what if you and your allies have been fomenting the civil war? malaise Aug 2013 #15

your description of the rebels isn't a good one. cali Aug 2013 #18

Called upon? By whom? Scuba Aug 2013 #24

+10000 heaven05 Aug 2013 #30

You seem to be leaving out a big part of your hypothesis... VanillaRhapsody Aug 2013 #31

He should do what he did regarding Libya. . . DinahMoeHum Aug 2013 #32

As was Kosovo question everything Aug 2013 #34

Syria is a civil war only in part. NuclearDem Aug 2013 #40

That rag tag bunch is completely capable of... Historic NY Aug 2013 #41

Uh huh. Zoeisright Aug 2013 #42

"Sanctions? Yes. Boycotts? Yes. Bombs? No." ConcernedCanuk Aug 2013 #44

Depends on what you mean by the "rabbit hole".....eom AverageJoe90 Aug 2013 #47

What do I mean? ConcernedCanuk Aug 2013 #49

What do you mean by payback, exactly? AverageJoe90 Aug 2013 #50

Excerpt from: Two and a Half Years Later: Inside 'Liberated' Syria pampango Aug 2013 #46

K&R idwiyo Aug 2013 #52

DURec. bvar22 Aug 2013 #63