Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Marr

(20,317 posts)

33. I'm not conflicted at all.

Reply to DemocratSinceBirth (Original post)

Fri Sep 6, 2013, 01:45 AM

Sep 2013

The people of the US have very recently been bald faced lied into a tragic, costly invasion in a country neighboring this proposed target. Even if their story is 100% accurate, they've earned the strongest form of skepticism-- and their actual case has been quite weak. Couple that with the fact that their proposed action seems nonsensical and meaningless, and I don't see why anyone would get behind it.

As to the legal obligation, there isn't one. This gas was allegedly released in a civil war, not a war between nations.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

34 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

As a Democrat and a man of the left I am deeply conflicted about this situation. [View all] DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 OP

I'm also conflicted BainsBane Sep 2013 #1

I see hawks becoming doves and doves becoming hawks DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #3

It's all about party politics to them. BainsBane Sep 2013 #6

On both sides./nt DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #15

With all due respect, I don't see what the conflict is LibAsHell Sep 2013 #2

Why is punishing an aggressor laughable?/nt DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #4

Who is the aggressor here? MNBrewer Sep 2013 #10

That's a legitimate question DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #13

Well, then, MNBrewer Sep 2013 #16

I would oppose that. DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #19

I don't know this for sure, but I sure do expect it to occur once Assad is gone MNBrewer Sep 2013 #21

And THAT is exactly the point few want to listen to. defacto7 Sep 2013 #28

We invade countries and drop bombs from drones LibAsHell Sep 2013 #25

Right there with you. Oakenshield Sep 2013 #30

+1 Blue_Tires Sep 2013 #5

That is probably my major concern BainsBane Sep 2013 #7

Not that this will matter any, but MNBrewer Sep 2013 #8

Respectfully, I would prefer other methods of crowd control/dispersal DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #11

Doesn't matter MNBrewer Sep 2013 #14

Tear gas and sarin gas are not comparable. n/t pnwmom Sep 2013 #18

SUre they are MNBrewer Sep 2013 #20

Their physical effects are not comparable. Tear gas isn't designed to kill. n/t pnwmom Sep 2013 #24

I honestly can't blame you. AverageJoe90 Sep 2013 #9

People who aren't troubled, who find this situation easy to navigate, well, hats off to 'em alcibiades_mystery Sep 2013 #12

I'm hoping that the UN report might make the right course clearer. pnwmom Sep 2013 #17

Why are chemical weapons the line in the sand? Why is it okay from countries including our own liberal_at_heart Sep 2013 #22

I'm with you d_r Sep 2013 #23

There are other avenues and other people Warpy Sep 2013 #26

Send in a Neville ..... peace in our time .... MindMover Sep 2013 #27

It shouldn't be hard for you to see this belongs in the realm of the UN. dkf Sep 2013 #29

I just don't see what good it willl do. potone Sep 2013 #31

Glad you posted your thoughts BootinUp Sep 2013 #32

I'm not conflicted at all. Marr Sep 2013 #33

Rep. Barbara Lee is voting No Dems to Win Sep 2013 #34