Originally Posted by Nicholas (Post 944119)

Yeah I can see your point here. As I said it's a tricky situation, there really is no wrong or right.



I'm British, but you're right very little. You're schooling me right now, but a couple of posts back I asked about this and got told the answer was obvious like I'm some kind of idiot. Maybe I'm ignorant, but our news gives us very little detail unfortunately. However I put myself out there as open to learn and got shut down, so.... what can I do?

Originally Posted by Godbody (Post 944115)

Nicholas you don't seem to understand that @Just C is absolutely right

We should offer our help if shit hits the fan and they're gassing their own people. That doesn't mean you can use that event to justify an invasion and possibly another war. This rises U.S. tension with Russia tremendously considering how we just fucked up Libya(Russian ally) and now we're pretty much waltzing into Syria despite Russia telling us not to simply because the U.S. + E.U. is a menace Russia wouldn't wanna deal with so they're letting this shit rock

The thing I'm pointing out is, why is it always OUR men and women? Don't China & India have armies bigger than ours? Why aren't they going "Omg Syria, we out"

Why does the U.S. ALWAYS involve itself in worldly affairs that don't pertain to them and why in the last 12 years has the focus for "aid" and "liberation" been in a concentrated area such as the middle east?

Everytime these wars happen it's almost always my cousins, my friends, etc putting their lives on the line because OUR government has a problem with another government and world leaders are too pussy to put the gloves on and fight

If you have family in the army and they're always getting shipped off somewhere that has extremists and pretty lethal weaponry you'd feel the same fuckin way

to sum up this thread: why does the U.S. have to play Captain Save A Ho and why is it always in the middle east when the entire world has countries plagued with disease that kill waaaay more people than wars. or in Africa's case, genocides. Genocides are still humans committing crimes on humanity..isn't that what we respond to? Yet we left Africa alone

We leave all these countries alone until our world leaders get bored and decide to they need to flex on these other niggas

Originally Posted by Phoenix (Post 944123)

Lol I told you the answer was obvious cause I thought you already know about Hezoballah I wasn't trying to say you an idiot or anything...

Originally Posted by Just C (Post 944126)

Exactly what Pulse said, you don't see China or India poking their noses in. It always seems to be us and the US. And again. If we want to talk about doing whats right. We can pick holes in that notion all day. Theirs been plenty of examples of dictators murding their own people where we didn't get involved. Maybe that has something to do with maybe it isn't about "whats right" and has more to do with some sort of monitary gain or political power play.

Originally Posted by Noble (Post 944130)

I think it's ridiculous to say "you guys can kill each other and carry on your Civil War, but just don't do it in this way with chemical weapons." The only way I can see a third-party intervening justifiably is if it was about the use of nuclear weapons, because that is something that once the radiation spreads, will affect all of us not just the parties involved. Regardless of whether or not Syria is actually using chemical weapons, there do seem to be some sort of ulterior motive. In war, nothing is sacred. People will use whatever means is available to them to get the job done. As much as we can judge their use of chemical weapons, our indiscriminate use of drones that often times kills civilians can be judged in the same way.