“Make no mistake, in an increasingly complicated world of sectarian and religious extremist violence, what we choose to do or not do matters in real ways to our own security. Some site the risk of doing things. But we need to ask, ‘What is the risk of doing nothing?’,” Kerry said. “It matters because if we choose to live in the world where a thug and a murderer like Bashar al-Assad can gas thousands of his own people with impunity, even after the United States and our allies said no, and then the world does nothing about it, there will be no end to the test of our resolve and the dangers that will flow from those others who believe that they can do as they will.”
Does that sound like a good reason to start another war in the Middle East? To me, it sounds more like The United States insisting on being the policeman of the world. Of course, there probably is more to it, secret deals and hidden motivations, maybe CIA shit.
These are the kinds of wars we've fought recently, usually triggered by the natural resources that are at stake or the geographical control, never for the honorable reasons stated by lying politicians in Washington. Then, we get blowhard veterans like Moonshine coming around here boasting about how he personally fought in these questionable wars to protect my rights.
There hasn't been a war in our lifetimes that fits that bill. Not since the defeat of Nazism has there been an honorable war that truly put our rights as Americans at stake. So, forgive me if I don't buy into the nonsense of pathetic vets who join the service because there were no jobs at home or in order to get approval from daddy who was a whining Vietnam vet himself and then claim they were preserving our freedom and ensuring that we maintain our rights.
I don't buy it. And now with the addition of Syria as a possible venue of the next farce, unless North Korea or Iran take center stage again, it's about time for people to stop elevating these actions as patriotic endeavors. They're not.
1. The Korean War wasn't a spectacular success, but plenty of South Koreans would say that they're happier as things stand than they might have been.
ReplyDelete2. Afghanistan was a necessary war. It was the nation that harbored Osama bin Ladin--and was virulently anti-women, though perhaps that doesn't matter to you.
3. Chemical weapons are in a class beyond mere conventional explosives and firearms. Any leader who would use those against the citizens of his own country deserves to be removed. The only question at that point is whether we have the capability.
Policemen of the world, that's what you're defending? And you call yourself a Libertarian. Rand would be ashamed of you.
DeleteMy term for my position is now Eleutherian:
Deletehttp://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/2013/07/01/how-government-governs-best/
Isn't this what the U.N was for? The arms trade treaty was suppose to protect women and children right? Why isn't the U.N. standing up and leading the charge here? This a civil war, not our place to be involved in.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, not our place.
DeleteTypical gun loon thinking. If a law, or regulation cannot solve a problem 100%, then it is useless and more harmful to law abiding citizens. By that logic all laws and regulations should be erased from the books. A lawless society, anarchy.
ReplyDeleteCan't you even match comments with articles?
Delete