General Discussion

cheapdate

(3,811 posts)

72. There is no crystal ball.

Mon Sep 2, 2013, 06:28 PM

Sep 2013

Of course I know that innocent people die when bombs fall, and will die if the US launches an attack. I also know that innocent people die gruesome and grisly deaths when nerve agents are dispersed over populated areas.

The question you present is which course of action preserves the most life? I certainly don't know the answer. I can't say that a US reprisal attack would kill X number of civilians, but would prevent Y number of civilian deaths from future chemical attacks by the Assad government -- attacks that will never happen because the last time the Assad government did it they were subjected to an intense and sustained bombardment by 5 US carrier groups in the Mediterranean and another 2 carrier groups in the Persian Gulf.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

116 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This Modern World: And Away We Go -- - Nothing Says "We Care" Like A Tomahawk Missile Strike [View all] kpete Sep 2013 OP

Spot ON! nt adirondacker Sep 2013 #1

It shows that Obama is SERIOUS! Leaders must listen to what he says! n2doc Sep 2013 #2

Don't you mean RoccoR5955 Sep 2013 #10

I always wondered about that 'leader of the free world' thing. Do they know sabrina 1 Sep 2013 #13

"Free Countries"?? Oh, The Ones Supporting Death Squads HumansAndResources Sep 2013 #82

Well, I'm talking about European countries, Latin American countries, Australia, India, iow, sabrina 1 Sep 2013 #91

From my perspective, if it's true that Bashar Al-Assad used nerve gas cheapdate Sep 2013 #17

What message is that? n2doc Sep 2013 #22

It doesn't pass the smell test. Enthusiast Sep 2013 #30

The message would be that there will be a significant price to pay cheapdate Sep 2013 #47

So, we weaken Assad, and strengthen Al Qaida? n2doc Sep 2013 #49

Russian CW? Or Saudi Arabian? HumansAndResources Sep 2013 #83

You laid out the pros and cons very well lyonn Sep 2013 #23

There are no pros. nt awoke_in_2003 Sep 2013 #45

Do you think that using nerve agents on populated areas cheapdate Sep 2013 #48

Violence begets violence n2doc Sep 2013 #50

I believe there is much more going on along cheapdate Sep 2013 #54

So the purpose is to basically masturbate our sense of self-righteousness? Scootaloo Sep 2013 #52

That's an outrageously cynical way to frame cheapdate Sep 2013 #58

I don't think you understand the concept of morals. Scootaloo Sep 2013 #64

We agree that for the sake of argument cheapdate Sep 2013 #71

You know, I was accused of "supporting Saddam" in 2003, too. Scootaloo Sep 2013 #75

I agree with most all of your points cheapdate Sep 2013 #109

Well, here's the thing... Scootaloo Sep 2013 #110

I agree, Scootaloo, but fear most Americans aren't hearing any of these arguments drynberg Sep 2013 #74

We have learned from the past that anything can be staged! juajen Sep 2013 #55

I don't have any doubt that there was a release of nerve gas cheapdate Sep 2013 #59

Yep, but we are the "shoot and ask questions later" bandits juajen Sep 2013 #53

NO,,, Cryptoad Sep 2013 #27

Who will the cruise missile target? Assad? me b zola Sep 2013 #44

Even a short action could inflict substantial losses to the Assad government's cheapdate Sep 2013 #51

Yes, we will be killing "little people" to show that killing "little people" WHEN CRABS ROAR Sep 2013 #62

How many innocent civilians should die so he can be delivered his message? Marrah_G Sep 2013 #70

There is no crystal ball. cheapdate Sep 2013 #72

I have a question about that rpannier Sep 2013 #78

Yes, dead is dead. cheapdate Sep 2013 #80

"free world(tm)"? Ocelot Sep 2013 #19

What about the following part? lark Sep 2013 #43

France might. Maybe. Israel would rather let us do the hard stuff. n2doc Sep 2013 #46

Have heard nothing affirmative about France taking part. lark Sep 2013 #103

Not true. Many countries in the region are pushing for action, cheapdate Sep 2013 #61

Paragons of Virtue? I don't find any evidence of moral-authority there. HumansAndResources Sep 2013 #86

Yes, no one's hands are clean. cheapdate Sep 2013 #87

Is it definite that the Syrian government is responsible? deutsey Sep 2013 #95

That would, of course, depend on who you ask. cheapdate Sep 2013 #104

That's my understanding as well deutsey Sep 2013 #111

Many of the Earlier CW Reports were Blamed on the Rebels HumansAndResources Sep 2013 #113

Assad was fighting the rebels in areas cheapdate Sep 2013 #114

Perhaps Familiarity With Bush's Support For the Jihadis in Libya Since 2007 Is More Persuasive? HumansAndResources Sep 2013 #115

Did George W. Bush cause millions of Syrians to stage nationwide demonstrations cheapdate Sep 2013 #116

Are they supporting action materially? lark Sep 2013 #102

I've heard variously that some are and some aren't. cheapdate Sep 2013 #108

Couldn't have said it better. mbperrin Sep 2013 #3

The NEW "Care Packages!" Mark our Rockets and Bombs with that Logo. n/t KoKo Sep 2013 #4

Almost like the US was just looking for a reason to bomb Syria. valerief Sep 2013 #5

Ya think? RC Sep 2013 #12

Took the words right out of my mouth. nt valerief Sep 2013 #14

Yeah, have to pay for important things first.... daleanime Sep 2013 #16

Also add in the rationale for ever more surveillance and extra justification for the alphabet suffragette Sep 2013 #18

that'll leave a mark. KG Sep 2013 #6

. . . but hey, at least Chuckles isn't a member of the "Batshit Insane" party, right? HughBeaumont Sep 2013 #7

who writes the rules to this game, anyway? Supersedeas Sep 2013 #85

Great post! K&R Rebellious Republican Sep 2013 #8

"So would a Facebook, with fewer casualties." 99Forever Sep 2013 #9

We should be amazed we live in an age where this thinking is now mainstream! reformist2 Sep 2013 #11

The medium is the message, I guess. nt valerief Sep 2013 #15

sob! admit it made me laugh. oldandhappy Sep 2013 #20

Basically just a glib gloss. gulliver Sep 2013 #21

Really? How's the drug war going? nt Union Scribe Sep 2013 #25

Another glib gloss. nt gulliver Sep 2013 #26

An inconvenient question Bradical79 Sep 2013 #34

The defense rests. nt gulliver Sep 2013 #35

sure Bradical79 Sep 2013 #37

What?!? chervilant Sep 2013 #29

Think context. gulliver Sep 2013 #31

"Blah, blah, blah, Ginger, blah, blah, blah..." chervilant Sep 2013 #38

In that case I guess we should have lobbed a few into Wall Street. Enthusiast Sep 2013 #32

We should have bombed the BeeJeezus out of BP Vanje Sep 2013 #42

like when we punished saddam? frylock Sep 2013 #39

This is different. gulliver Sep 2013 #40

I have a question about that. ChaoticTrilby Sep 2013 #68

Rulers NEVER Care about "The Troops" - Kissinger: "... dumb, stupid animals to be used" HumansAndResources Sep 2013 #89

Of course. ChaoticTrilby Sep 2013 #112

Maybe the least informative posts I have seen this week. n-t Logical Sep 2013 #84

Surreal. pecwae Sep 2013 #93

K&R MotherPetrie Sep 2013 #24

And delivered by a Nobel Peace Prize recipient. Graybeard Sep 2013 #28

I think I'll join you. nt ChaoticTrilby Sep 2013 #69

The Nobel commitee was punked :( Marrah_G Sep 2013 #73

He must be reading DU nadinbrzezinski Sep 2013 #33

Cause nothing says "moral authority" like indiscriminate missile strikes. DirkGently Sep 2013 #36

does any1 know questionseverything Sep 2013 #41

Cost for a Tomahwak Deacon Blue Sep 2013 #88

Good lord... deutsey Sep 2013 #96

ggod cartoon and thought provoking gopiscrap Sep 2013 #56

OMG!! Tom T hits it out of the freaking park, AGAIN!! K&R ~nt 99th_Monkey Sep 2013 #57

Right on. felix_numinous Sep 2013 #60

"Our opinions mean NOTHING to them" and there you have it. WHEN CRABS ROAR Sep 2013 #65

Yes felix_numinous Sep 2013 #66

Been involved in the movements since civil rights. WHEN CRABS ROAR Sep 2013 #77

K&R DeSwiss Sep 2013 #63

K&R NealK Sep 2013 #67

K&R idwiyo Sep 2013 #76

If Obama sends a strongly worded Facebook post ... Martin Eden Sep 2013 #79

In all seriousness . . . another_liberal Sep 2013 #81

Yup. It could really backfire. avaistheone1 Sep 2013 #92

It will never stop there. McCain was chirruping excitedly DirkGently Sep 2013 #99

He most likely gets a campaign contribution . . . another_liberal Sep 2013 #105

He doesn't meet many ME countries he doesn't want DirkGently Sep 2013 #106

Most decidedly. another_liberal Sep 2013 #107

Something just occurred to me about the old "Iraq sent their chem weapons to Syria" line. Marr Sep 2013 #90

Taking out planes that would deliver chemical attacks does say we care michigandem58 Sep 2013 #94

Unless you lived near the planes. morningfog Sep 2013 #97

Perfect isn't an option michigandem58 Sep 2013 #100

So, we could kill, what, 1490 and they should thank us? morningfog Sep 2013 #101

Except that planes didn't deliver the chemical weapons. bullwinkle428 Sep 2013 #98