"We are pretty sure what will happen if we don't react. Bloodshed. Whether its a brutal civil war or a slow killing of own population. Thats what we risk by doing nothing."
We don't risk killing people for 0 gain if we don't react. That's my point. Unless we know we're actually helping the Syrian people--which we don't--unless it's somehow our business, you've hardly provided justification for war.
Your argument is that "well it's bad now" so we should invade? For what gain? You don't know, because we don't know who would rise to power.
It appears the rebels just slaughtered civilians yesterday. As expected, more evidence of what I've been saying all along. Egypt elected extremists into a majority in both parliament and the office of president, more evidence of what I've been saying all along.
Where's the evidence that the rebels are democratic, non extremists who deserve our support? You continually miss the point that you've not provided any justification for war.
"Many towns got looted. Large parts of the south were destroyed. It was a socioeconomic disaster. Ok its not like the natives but still not an example of "why bother"."
And again you missed the point! Reading skills aren't your strong suite, huh? I was talking about the cultural presumptions you make about the Syrian rebels, who you think MUST be better than Assad's regime, because you just presume they're like you or me. You continually provide no evidence that they deserve our support in warfare, and miss the point every time I question your presumption.
"I beg to differ. Even if the idea is only shared by a minority its still there."
I didn't argue that nobody had democratic ideals. I argued that, because a majority do not, trying to force democracy upon people who aren't prepared to take part in it tends to result in minority extremists with organization taking power, as we're seeing in Egypt. That's my point. That a minority is not extremists and values democratic principles is irrelevant. Again you miss the point! Damn you're consistent.
I never argued that NOBODY held democratic ideals. Why would you presume that? That's just stupid. How is it relevant to what I said to point out that a minority hold democratic ideals? Of course they do. So what? You don't have a point. You're just ignoring all of my points. This is more of the stupid, pointless rambling. I can hardly respect a low level of spamming responses that don't even demonstrate comprehension of, let alone responses to my points and arguments. I can't debate or discuss anything with anyone who cannot comprehend my simple statements in simple English.
I'm not using big words. I'm not using overly complex sentences in conjunction with big words. I don't see any legitimate reason why you're missing the point of absolutely everything I say and responding as if I said something else with irrelevant nonsense.
So there's a minority with democratic values? So what? That's not a response to what I said. That's an obvious fact with no relevance. That's why you don't get respect: because you're being disrespectful to everybody. You're just insulting me and anyone else unfortunate enough to read this drivel with stupid responses like this one. It doesn't make any sense. It's not a response to what I said. It has no relevance to anything. It's just dumb.
"Its a big challenge but no reason to keep the country in the dark for centuries to come. It took the west a while to become what they are now, with steps forward and backward, and there's a long process ahead still. That doesn't mean it was all worth it."
Nobody invaded and pushed freedoms on the West. When an authoritarian regime is in civil war with a wannabe authoritarian regime, the West invading and trying to force a democratic government upon those groups isn't helping them in a "process." To pretend that Syria is in a "process" toward freedoms, or to pretend that they're in a "process" and we should help them by invading them, is just bizarre. There's no parallel. They're culturally very different from the West, and they're fighting for very different reasons. Furthermore, no Western nation was aided in its struggle for self-determination by invasion. Even foreign aid was in the case of sustained war efforts with clear sides with clear causes.
So keep missing points and insulting all of us! Continue not answering our questions regarding the rebels and our lack of any reason to expect them to be better than Assad's regime! Just argue that it's bad, and clearly it'll be better if we rain death from the sky and switch their tyrannical regime out for another one! That always helps.
[I wish I could obey forum rules]
