US has 10,000 fighting men,17 warships,70 fighter-bombers,10 destroyers/frigates off Syria

Funniest comment was that I have an agenda. How incredibly hilarious. I focus my criticism at one country, the source, by any rational description the biggest empire in the history of mankind policing foreign land, foreign seas and now apparently space. Hundreds of foreign bases, half the world's weapons, half the world's expenditure on "defense". You support an empire which is anti almost everyone.

Yet I have "an agenda"? That's cute. I guess being pro-US is not an agenda, even though it is a position which is "anti" more countries than any other political agenda. I guess being a democrat or a republican is not an agenda. I guess if I supported this empire then my agenda wouldn't be questioned lol. I guess an agenda which doesn't promote violence and wants the US military to just stay in America and defend America - like most countries - is a questionable and evil agenda. How sinister of me!! Whereas the agenda which promotes war - one major war every 15 years - and placing weapons/soldiers/bases in other people's territories... that is the agenda which shouldn't be questioned. I guess if I disagree with those policies, I must hate Americans. What a foolish thought, as if respecting the sovereignty of other nations in the same way that you expect you sovereignty to be respected is anti-America. As if American citizens don't need that money. As if they don't need their government to focus more on the well-being of its own people. It may be a confusing concept to many of you, but a person can be pro-American and anti-America foreign policy. A country does not have to continuously expand internationally to protect and serve its own people unless it creates the conditions to do that.

I don't put it beyond Bashar to use chemical weapons on people he labels terrorists, this is no different than any warring country. I am just saying there is nothing which changed in the past 2 weeks which indicates that he is more likely to use chemical weapons now. This is sham pretext for you, the citizens, and for Middle Easterners. After all, it is widely agreed by ordinary Middle Easterners that the US is the biggest threat to the Middle East. The fact that the majority of their leaders don't agree with that is irrelevant, and in fact makes the point quite nicely. Every additional power grab must be managed carefully, and that's exactly what this is - a power grab.

Do I worry about questionable rebels coming into possession of power? Yes. That includes yourselves, and Russia, and the extremist Islamists which are part of the rebellion now. I think some of those rebels make the Muslim Brotherhood look like left-wing radicals. I know and you know your government has absolutely no issues with arming and empowering a morally corrupt government. This is not to say it actively intends to support morally corrupt governments, but it will support anyone regardless of morals as long as they protect US interests. To be perfectly clear, I would prefer not to have those Islamists running Syria post-Assad. I do not differentiate between a Russia-dominated Syria and an America-dominated Syria. But above all, I want the fewest deaths.

Syria is not Libya and it's not Egypt. Russia will not watch it slide IMO. They will act like any empire-loving nation - they will fight it with weapons, and if they don't succeed they will do so by sending hoards of cash, funding militants and political candidates and opposition groups, encouraging rebellion, empowering Iran. They will want to attack as many American interests as possible, in any way possible without having an all-out war which they know they have little chance of winning, the fruits of which they would have even less chance of keeping.

 

My view is that they should have intervened at the start. The extremists are an unfortunate necessity at this point. They are part of the rebels. They will not disappear. This sucks for you, sucks for me, and most importantly sucks for Syrians. In addition, they owe a debt to these people. It is not black and white. It's like being saved from a car accident by a child abuser while a rapist is screaming "WATCH OUT" from the sidewalk.

At this point I would welcome anyone's intervention to be frank. All else constant, the fact that someone/anyone is going to stop this is great. I have no issue with this. My issue is with what happens after that, and what has already been happening towards that end i.e. nation building, king-making, official bribery, etc. If this is a case of the US intervening then completely leaving the Syrian population to determine its own future 100% then I'm all for it. But we would have to be fools to believe that - an uncomfortable truth that Egyptians have become aware of recently and dozens of countries in the past. I hope I am wrong, but not even the most left-wing democrat truly believes that.

Unfortunately there's something else in the way of Syrian self-determination which is the "glorious" presence of extremist Islamic rebels. Make no mistake, these are the most extreme and thanks to the horrendous bickering of the international community they have a foot in this door now and the credibility to make demands.

I would also AGAIN recommend removing veto power from the 5 UN permanent members. We could have had a more international coalition intervening, helping and then leaving. This could have been dealt with far better if not for Russia and China playing games with the lives of Syrians. Unfortunately, this means the US loses its veto power too so a pipe dream at best.

For the purposes of controlling the Syrian government:

Bashar: bad
Extremists: bad
Russia: bad
America: bad
Any foreign country imposing itself: bad
Syrian people: good

Btw US foreign policy is not ****ty "at times" lol. The policies and their underlying principles are inherently bad and they are meant to be indifferent to moral standards. It is a policy which amasses and protects foreign interests - which is a branding strategy for stealing the interests of citizens of other countries. This is something which hurts almost all Americans and non-Americans. It costs more than you can afford, and Americans suffer from it. It bankrupts the country and makes you have to compromise with the repressive policies of the few rich people left in the country. Those people sell things that profit from empire - news, weapons, natural resources, etc. It's a terrible cycle and it's costing lives. It's not unique to America, but the potential for fatal repercussions are so large when you have a military this size with these weapons and these influences.