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
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Syria conflict: BBC shown 'signs of chemical attack' [View all]eissa
(4,238 posts)31. Until I see the same call for the Saudis and Qataris
to stop shipping arms, I fail to see the balance in any of this. Ideally, no country would be supporting a civil war. Sadly, that's not the case. If certain countries want to call on the Russians to stop aiding their ally (the same we have done/would do for our allies) then the same call should go to the countries financing the rebels.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
53 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
In time of despair, you can even lie down with dogs. Especially when nobody do anything.
Sand Wind
May 2013
#13
I would be interested to hear more about the defection rate of the FSA. According to the
pampango
May 2013
#53
The opposition is not "an equally brutal Islamic fundamentalist". Some are, not all.
pampango
May 2013
#34
Assad appears to be gaining ground, and the rebels losing popular support.
Comrade Grumpy
May 2013
#22
Iraq is WORSE OFF, by every metric, since we invaded on the same pretext. NO WAR WITH SYRIA.
grahamhgreen
May 2013
#9
how is this worse than just blowing people up with bombs? And how is it a threat to us or Europe?
yurbud
May 2013
#12
You cannot be an empire when its please you, and then retracte from responsabilities
Sand Wind
May 2013
#14
Given the suspicions about their use of chemical weapons, no, it's not right
muriel_volestrangler
May 2013
#23
If someone posts about nasty people the US govt arms, do you reply
muriel_volestrangler
May 2013
#39
Remember Gen. Wesley Clark's disclosure of neocon list of countries to overthrow?
yurbud
May 2013
#41
Which is nothing to do with your dismissal of this as "is this a threat to us?"
muriel_volestrangler
May 2013
#42
actually, "Is it a threat to us" is a good first filter to decide if a war is worth our resources
yurbud
May 2013
#43
yours is the "head in the sand" knee-jerk supports WAR and demands proof for why we SHOULDN'T do it
yurbud
May 2013
#44
I don't support war. I have not "demanded proof for why we shouldn't do it"
muriel_volestrangler
May 2013
#45
How often do you think we go into military actions for purely humanitarian reasons?
yurbud
May 2013
#46
Attacking civilians. Sounds more like the fundamentalist foreign rebels to me.
socialsecurityisAAA
May 2013
#20
This is at least the third round of accusing the Syrian government of using chemicals/gas...
rjones2818
May 2013
#28
As the video shows, they have good medical evidence of poisonous substances
muriel_volestrangler
May 2013
#30
War propaganda is supposed to be a fact as long as western allies make the claims
socialsecurityisAAA
May 2013
#40