General Discussion

MineralMan

(146,281 posts)

69. Yes. I've said that the West doesn't understand the ME

Fri Sep 6, 2013, 04:24 PM

Sep 2013

a number of times here on DU. My own personal preference would be that we had never meddled in affairs in that region in the first place. That's an opinion I've held since the late 1950s, and still hold it. Thanks.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

177 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What if we don't do anything about Syria, and [View all] MineralMan Sep 2013 OP

Oh, so it's been proven Assad did this attack? leftstreet Sep 2013 #1

The evidence certainly points in that direction. MineralMan Sep 2013 #3

'Points,' but hasn't been established. Okay n/t leftstreet Sep 2013 #6

I didn't say it had been established. I said "apparently," MineralMan Sep 2013 #18

So your whole OP is just a 'what if' leftstreet Sep 2013 #31

It was clearly presented as a "what if" question. MineralMan Sep 2013 #39

Okay. What if Assad didn't do it? leftstreet Sep 2013 #45

You know, if you didn't even read the first two words MineralMan Sep 2013 #47

+100 It hasn't even been established if Assad did it the first time. avaistheone1 Sep 2013 #79

Lots of what ifs on your part also lumpy Sep 2013 #82

It looks as if they probably did the Damascus one but throughout... Little Star Sep 2013 #127

Right, DU'ers aren't in denial. Thanks for proving part of the point of my OP. KittyWampus Sep 2013 #4

So the House is in denial, too? leftstreet Sep 2013 #9

Good question? Do you know the answer? MineralMan Sep 2013 #14

because regardless if Assad did it or not, they don't want bombing? KittyWampus Sep 2013 #16

What other options did Obama put on the table? leftstreet Sep 2013 #36

Do you have to have someone else answer your questions instead of doing research yourself? lumpy Sep 2013 #92

Perhaps because those in the House are only interested in the next campaign, they have a lot lumpy Sep 2013 #107

That is fucking offensive to DUers leftstreet Sep 2013 #110

Sorry, just being snarky like so many of your compatriots. I apologize I don't want to be offensive. lumpy Sep 2013 #118

kick jessie04 Sep 2013 #144

I was thinking the same thing. Fantastic Anarchist Sep 2013 #48

what's the difference who did it?SOMEONE violated international humanitarian law. Sunlei Sep 2013 #153

We're going to have to send a lot of aid to neighboring countries, for one thing. KittyWampus Sep 2013 #2

Yes. I put it a little more conditionally, MineralMan Sep 2013 #7

First, you need to prove Assad conducted the first attack. ocpagu Sep 2013 #5

See, how can DU'ers really be this unaware? Germany, France etc have in fact agreed w/intelligence KittyWampus Sep 2013 #10

Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Argentina, Brazil disagree leftstreet Sep 2013 #15

Add Venezuela and Guyana among those who explicitly opposed. There are more. n/t ocpagu Sep 2013 #29

So what. They have not been directly involved, with the exception of Russia and their involvment lumpy Sep 2013 #102

Oh yeah, we are as unaware as you are gullible SomethingFishy Sep 2013 #30

According to the article posted- the questions remaining are, who actually controls some of the lumpy Sep 2013 #115

There are lots of unanswered questions... SomethingFishy Sep 2013 #121

Sorry you don't believe that Assad might be responsible for gas attacks. I prefer to believe the lumpy Sep 2013 #125

He may be, but he may not be... unless there is some classified evidence SomethingFishy Sep 2013 #131

Well where were you when Assad was torturing and killing? I am helpless to do much about killings lumpy Sep 2013 #136

Shame on the European puppet governments then. ocpagu Sep 2013 #58

Hell, the only proof they will accept would have to come from ??? lumpy Sep 2013 #90

Hmm...no, I don't have to prove anything. MineralMan Sep 2013 #12

I said "you" because in your question you asked "we"... ocpagu Sep 2013 #22

This message was self-deleted by its author GeorgeGist Sep 2013 #149

Especially since there are fairly credible allegations that rebels used chem weapons provided HardTimes99 Sep 2013 #26

Exactly. Fantastic Anarchist Sep 2013 #51

"some confidence, at a small level" BOG PERSON Sep 2013 #142

LMAO! Fantastic Anarchist Sep 2013 #143

"FAIRLY credible allegations" doesn't cut it more than critizing others for using similar replies lumpy Sep 2013 #122

Other countries have concluded that it was Assad's party, like Germany, France for instance. lumpy Sep 2013 #87

Based on tazkcmo Sep 2013 #112

OK prove that it was just info provided bythe US. We don't know everything do we ? lumpy Sep 2013 #119

Prove it wasn't. tazkcmo Sep 2013 #120

"Based on information provided by the US", your statement. A statement as though it be based lumpy Sep 2013 #126

That would be terrible in my opinion. ZombieHorde Sep 2013 #8

what if he doesn't. what if the rebels use sarin again? cali Sep 2013 #11

A question is not an answer. MineralMan Sep 2013 #13

I did more than ask a question, MM. but thanks for letting us know that only YOU cali Sep 2013 #37

I started the OP with a question. I can do that. MineralMan Sep 2013 #43

What if we lob a few dozen hundred missiles and the slaughter continues? Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #17

See, the thing is that I would like to analyze a number of MineralMan Sep 2013 #23

It seems to me there will be slaughter, regardless. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #44

What if it wasn't Assad? idwiyo Sep 2013 #19

OK, what if it wasn't? MineralMan Sep 2013 #24

Exactly the same thing I am saying now: absolutely no foreign military involvement in a civil war. idwiyo Sep 2013 #49

Ask yourself whatchamacallit Sep 2013 #20

Another question to answer my question? MineralMan Sep 2013 #28

Wtf... You admit you're in the group the question is directed at whatchamacallit Sep 2013 #42

I don't have an answer, and was hoping for a discussion to help MineralMan Sep 2013 #46

Ok, I'll take a stab at your (mostly pointless) hypothetical whatchamacallit Sep 2013 #50

Thanks. An answer, at last. MineralMan Sep 2013 #52

You're welcome! whatchamacallit Sep 2013 #54

How about we take our case to the UN???? reformist2 Sep 2013 #21

See- Many DU'ers are in denial and refuse to acknowledge the possibility. Even if you say FINE- KittyWampus Sep 2013 #25

Nothing beyond humanitarian aid. Their country, their war, their business. idwiyo Sep 2013 #94

I don't think Putin would like being sent to the Hague. lumpy Sep 2013 #130

I am sure he wouldn't. But the girl can dream... :) idwiyo Sep 2013 #137

The decision is not between bombing and doing nothing. polichick Sep 2013 #27

Well, right now, it seems to be the case. MineralMan Sep 2013 #32

How can the US be a credible leader on this when the US has used chemical weapons itself? PDJane Sep 2013 #33

That's an inconvenient question. We do because we can. The justifications are convenient. libdem4life Sep 2013 #176

Sure dropping a bomb on top of another violent act I don't believe will help. Cleita Sep 2013 #34

Your whole thread is based on the assumption that Assad ordered the gas attack. polly7 Sep 2013 #35

Could it just be possible that this erstwhile Skidmore Sep 2013 #101

Ohhhhh Good Grief...... lumpy Sep 2013 #134

Wedgie? nt. polly7 Sep 2013 #135

more concerned that we can't predict the consequences of OUR OWN actions bigtree Sep 2013 #38

interesting question, My guess is that Assad does it again and more of our allies CTyankee Sep 2013 #40

Thanks. That seems like a reasonable answer. MineralMan Sep 2013 #61

Take it to the UN -- Hell Hath No Fury Sep 2013 #41

Still none of our business.. sendero Sep 2013 #53

OK. That is an answer. Thank you. MineralMan Sep 2013 #55

Lot more nonsensical bickering bobGandolf Sep 2013 #56

Maybe this makes me a terrible person 1awake Sep 2013 #57

Thanks for your direct answer. MineralMan Sep 2013 #59

What if we throw a bunch of cruise missiles at Syria and 0rganism Sep 2013 #60

That's really a different question. Mine assumes no action on our part MineralMan Sep 2013 #63

It's what your initial question led me to think 0rganism Sep 2013 #76

Well, it's already started on a distinct down note, for sure. MineralMan Sep 2013 #78

the Middle East is where diplomacy goes to die 0rganism Sep 2013 #83

So it has seemed to me for as long as I can remember. MineralMan Sep 2013 #85

What if it were the same rebels who've been proven to polly7 Sep 2013 #62

Another question as an answer. MineralMan Sep 2013 #65

My apologies. nt. polly7 Sep 2013 #67

Also not responsive. MineralMan Sep 2013 #70

The UN and The Hague -- these are the avenues for action under Int'l Law. 99th_Monkey Sep 2013 #64

So, if there were another attack, you'd say MineralMan Sep 2013 #68

I'd say do that, AND the Hague AND real humanitarian relief to victims as possible, yes. 99th_Monkey Sep 2013 #71

Makes sense. MineralMan Sep 2013 #72

I think Westerners greatly underestimate Skidmore Sep 2013 #66

Yes. I've said that the West doesn't understand the ME MineralMan Sep 2013 #69

I would think those opposed to a strike would have to back track rapidly. Thinkingabout Sep 2013 #73

Perhaps. I'm not sure that would happen, though. MineralMan Sep 2013 #77

What if, instead... CincyDem Sep 2013 #74

........ polly7 Sep 2013 #128

Then perhaps the Arab League will act Warpy Sep 2013 #75

That, I think, would be an excellent outcome. MineralMan Sep 2013 #80

The Arab League can tell us how high to jump as Skidmore Sep 2013 #84

That would help. Perhaps China will sell us the technology Warpy Sep 2013 #88

A couple of thoughts-- Jackpine Radical Sep 2013 #81

All true. We often make mistakes when we MineralMan Sep 2013 #86

What if we wait and see what the UN inspectors find? Javaman Sep 2013 #89

What if we DO do something and he conducts another one anyway? JHB Sep 2013 #91

I think there is more of a likelihood of chemical attack... kentuck Sep 2013 #93

That's possible, too, of course. MineralMan Sep 2013 #98

What if it were rebels? Than what? idwiyo Sep 2013 #99

If they were "our " rebels...? kentuck Sep 2013 #114

Saudi Arabia, Government stockpiles, anyone who will sell them chemicals (see UK for example). idwiyo Sep 2013 #117

Sarin gas manufacture isn't the exclusive domain of governments Art_from_Ark Sep 2013 #173

What if he doubles down when we attack? What then? Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #95

Spot on. The Link Sep 2013 #96

There are many what ifs. I posed one. MineralMan Sep 2013 #105

Because they are all forms of the same question, man. A question to which there is no answer Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #111

I'm having a hard time rationalizing why chem weapons are BAD but Redford Sep 2013 #97

Yeah. All weapons are bad. MineralMan Sep 2013 #103

WW1? Why go back that far? Look at Saddam's use of poison gas on civilian and military Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #150

I went back to WWI because it was that war that MineralMan Sep 2013 #156

The UN could perhaps explain treestar Sep 2013 #139

What if we bomb, bomb, bomb Syria and then a few months later Assad madinmaryland Sep 2013 #100

Yes. That's another question, but it's not MineralMan Sep 2013 #108

I'm sorry I have to actually explain my post to you, but the point is that no matter what happens, madinmaryland Sep 2013 #116

Let me know when a large majority of the international community of nations wants to do something. L0oniX Sep 2013 #104

I won't have to let you know. It will be in the news. MineralMan Sep 2013 #109

It's a given....by whom???? That will provide the final nail in snappyturtle Sep 2013 #106

No intervention in Middle East civil wars. former9thward Sep 2013 #113

That is a great question. Rex Sep 2013 #123

If that were to happen, that would probably strengthen the case at the UN. Comrade Grumpy Sep 2013 #124

I believe the UN not the USA is tasked with policing the anti-chemical warfare treaties and laws. Vincardog Sep 2013 #129

If we don´t do anything about Syria - EHC ehcross Sep 2013 #132

You make the assumption that Assad did it to begin with, and that another will be on his order too. cleanhippie Sep 2013 #133

That would be sad. sibelian Sep 2013 #138

So many dodges of the question! treestar Sep 2013 #140

Some answers, though. I thanked those posters. MineralMan Sep 2013 #145

Who cares about those kids ?...None of our business. jessie04 Sep 2013 #146

Not bombing is not the same as "don't do anything" Precisely Sep 2013 #141

I have asked that same questions … 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2013 #147

So it seems. That is sad, I think. MineralMan Sep 2013 #157

So true ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2013 #172

Israel and SA can deal with it. GeorgeGist Sep 2013 #148

We have to do something and it has to be something with real teeth in it Cleita Sep 2013 #151

I think a faction of the Syrian military is operating on its own. Attacking Assad will just make leveymg Sep 2013 #152

agree w/ mineralman. If this chemical becomes commonplace, the next firework Sunlei Sep 2013 #154

the majority of the people in the usa don`t care now madrchsod Sep 2013 #155

Then we still do not attack. If he does it yet again, then we still don't attack. TheKentuckian Sep 2013 #158

Thanks for your response to the question. MineralMan Sep 2013 #159

Glad to participate. TheKentuckian Sep 2013 #174

THIS EXACTLY! backscatter712 Sep 2013 #171

What if... LWolf Sep 2013 #160

I completely agree that peaceful solutions are the ultimate answer. MineralMan Sep 2013 #161

I'm thinking that LWolf Sep 2013 #162

I don't disagree with you. MineralMan Sep 2013 #164

The US should not intervene, period. David__77 Sep 2013 #163

That is an excellent suggestion. It sometimes works. MineralMan Sep 2013 #165

Otherwise, it the 80s Afghanistan thing, redux. David__77 Sep 2013 #166

Yup. The Middle East has been a place for surrogate conflict MineralMan Sep 2013 #167

China just wants out of the spotlight. David__77 Sep 2013 #169

What if we do something about Syria, and the consequence is catastrophe for the whole world? Coyotl Sep 2013 #168

That's really a different discussion, I think. MineralMan Sep 2013 #170

We should do what we should have done from the beginning. Tell the world this is Russia's guy and stevenleser Sep 2013 #175

We aren't the only country abelenkpe Sep 2013 #177