?

Log in

No account? Create an account
HH Pout
Posted on Tuesday 27 August 2013 at 11:50 am

(No Subject)


Tags:
My country is about to start bombing the shit out of yet another nation. I think I'm going to cry.
The United States could hit Syria with three days of missile strikes, perhaps beginning Thursday, in an attack meant more to send a message to the Syrian regime than to cripple its military, senior U.S. officials told NBC News. The disclosure added to a growing drumbeat around the world for military action against Syria, believed to have used chemical weapons in recent days against scores of civilians and rebels who have been fighting the government for two years. (Source)

NB: This isn't to say that I think what Syria is doing is a good thing, just that I don't think the US dropping more bombs on more people has solved much of anything lately.

Comments:

Kizzia
kizzia at 6:52 pm on 27 August 2013 (UTC) (Link)
Apparently my country is joining in again. I will therefore join you in those tears. Here, I brought tissues!

No, seriously, I just don't understand why anyone thinks killing more people and involving our military in something that has nothing to do with us is a good idea. Yes, the use of chemical weapons on Syrian civilians is terrible but we don't even know, definitively, that it was the Syrian government who did it (although it does seem most likely) and rushing in guns blazing isn't going to help!

Grrrrrr! I just hope that the rest of the MP's, whom Mr Cameron has called back from their holidays to debate the issue, have more sense than he does and stop him.



Edited at 2013-08-27 06:53 pm (UTC)
Rachael
bratty_jedi at 11:30 pm on 27 August 2013 (UTC) (Link)
The whole situation sucks so badly and I feel so helpless. The worst is it isn't like I can offer a viable solution to everything but I do know this isn't a good path that we're heading down. How could we not have learned this by now? Between the US and the UK, how many centuries of experience do we need before we're going to figure out that we can't impose our will with guns on other countries and expect everything to be wonderful?

I mean, this is totally facile of a point but your icon made me want to say it: Victorian John Watson and 21st-century John Watson should not have been able to get wounded in essentially the same damn war. We just took a time out to let the Russians play for a while in the middle.
Unsentimental Fool
unsentimentalf at 12:46 pm on 28 August 2013 (UTC) (Link)
Yes, I get the feeling that we're proposing to bomb things because we can't think of an alternative. I understand that people feel that Something Must Be Done if the ban on chemical weapons is going to mean anything, but that's not Anything Must Be Tried.

Syria isn't going to stop its horrible civil war until some sort of ceasefire agreement is reached. Both sides appear to control too much area and too many soldiers to be defeated militarily by the other. If the West intervened to defeat the regime then they would end up , assuming they could even do it, with a country in the sort of turmoil that Iraq ended up in; the previous regime would form an active guerilla force with the support of a significant proportion of the population.

The only useful things we could do, as far as i can see, is to massively increase the UN monitors, investigate the chemical weapons attacks thoroughly and hold particular individuals and groups responsible, together with helping in any way with the move towards a ceasefire. It's difficult if the head of the regime really has authorised chemical attacks but it shouldn't be impossible. The IRA committed all sorts of atrocities and yet a ceasefire was finally agreed.
Rachael
bratty_jedi at 10:53 pm on 01 September 2013 (UTC) (Link)
Sorry I disappeared from my own political discussion for a few days there. Hectic week got away from me.

The only useful things we could do, as far as i can see, is to massively increase the UN monitors, investigate the chemical weapons attacks thoroughly and hold particular individuals and groups responsible,

A serious international legal system that could punish individuals rather than the innocents within a nation getting bombed would be one of the greatest steps forward for humanity, I think. We keep toying with it, but the balancing of that with national sovereignty is realistically very difficult to achieve.
Kizzia
kizzia at 9:50 pm on 28 August 2013 (UTC) (Link)
It's not facile, it's actually a very good point. One I agree with wholeheartedly.

On a slightly more cheerful note, Mr Cameron seems to be bowing slightly to the voices of reason and isn't going to rush into bombing without a UN resolution. Apparently. I seem to mistrust him for some reason!

Edited at 2013-08-28 09:51 pm (UTC)
Rachael
bratty_jedi at 10:51 pm on 01 September 2013 (UTC) (Link)
Sorry I disappeared from my own political discussion for a few days there. Hectic week got away from me.

I'm really intrigued by how this is playing out now. Your parliament voting it down isn't too surprising. Obama deciding to let my congress even vote on it is something new for the US in these kinds of situations. I don't know what to expect now.
Kizzia
kizzia at 12:54 pm on 02 September 2013 (UTC) (Link)
I'm intruiged too, I can't help thinking Obama's decision is his way of agreeing with the UK stepping back democratically (because Mr Cameron didn't, strictly speaking, have to call a vote to attack Syria).


   Leave a New Comment
Previous Entry  Next Entry