General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: So, let's see now... [View all]DanTex
(20,709 posts)You are again falling into the "views differ on shape of planet" fallacy, assuming that just because there are "two sides", they are somehow "balanced". Like I said in that OP, they are not. One side is off the deep end.
And this OP is a great example of that. How many of the people reccing do you think actually read the linked article to see what all the outrage is about? I don't even know if the OP even read it! Because all the outrage is about about a proposed slight increase in support to the Syrian opposition -- for example training 600 troops a month instead of 300 troops a month! 600 troops a month! The horror!
Next, I sincerely hope you don't think that genocide is a topic to be taken lightly, and that the idea humanitarian intervention to prevent genocide should be just dismissed with a silly internet meme. The OP, either out of ignorance or mendacity (probably both), chooses, of course, to compare this action in Syria to cold war misadventures, and ignores, say, Kosovo, or Rwanda, where the international community was widely criticized for failing to intervene. Or the mother of all humanitarian interventions, WW2.
No, let's not mention those. We don't want the lemmings to get confused by any kind of nuance or intellectual depth. Stick to the one-liners and the internet memes.