Who Is Really Behind the (coming) Syrian War ?

I don't know what the US should do re Syria. What worries me is deciding what our moral obligation is. It seems to be a fact that there was a sarin attack and many people were killed and injured. 100,000 people have been killed during this war. At what point do we, the nations of the world, have no choice but to act? 500,000 dead? 1,000,000? Or perhaps the magic number is 6 million. I think anyone who thinks these are easy decisions is deluding themselves.

The US had no moral standing here. Depleted uranium and white phosphorous are chemical weapons, and they will be used in any US attack on Syria. You do not save people by bombing them.

I feel deeply for these poor people but I am more disturbed at paragraph 3 of my link where our "elected commander in chief, the "president of the United States," encourages our "elected representatives" to dismiss the will and voice of the majority, to go "against" the very people who elected them to go to war against a nation who has not caused us any harm. Our constitution is, of the people, for the people and by the people. We are the people! For our elected leader to go against and to ask our other elected leaders to go against the wishes of the majority of our population is a person who is against our country. This man is no longer our elected leader. He is a man making decisions on his own. A man who is not representing America or our interests. This is a man with his own agenda.

Well said. I have said it before and I'll say it again. The Walt Disney presentation from the Hall of Presidents should be broadcast 24/7 on several outlets so the PEOPLE remember how our country was founded and what the job of politicians is supposed to be. I can not believe there is not absolute outrage at Obama's statement to "dismiss the will and voice of the majority". It shows clearly that he (and most other politicians) feel they are above listening to the people who put them in office. It is disgusting and disheartening.

If your neighbor was beating/killing his children, would you have a moral obligation to intervene?

If your neighbor was beating/killing his children, would you have a moral obligation to intervene?

this is so far from the case, it's almost not funny.

it's more like, if you hired one of your neighbors kids to kill his brothers and sisters and tried to blame it on the parents, would you "intervene" (by attacking the parents) ?

this situation is far more complex than simple metaphors that vastly over simplify the situation.

If your neighbor was beating/killing his children, would you have a moral obligation to intervene?

Are you serious?

Should other nations intervene when the US "mistakenly" wipes out an entire wedding party, or kills children in Afghanistan who were merely out looking for firewood?
Nobody intervened when the US was killing off the indigenous population of what is now America, and nobody intervened when Blacks were being lynched, burned, shot, and enslaved.
No intervention was in evidence when Agent Orange was used in Vietnam, and napalm, and white phosphorous...and have you looked at some of the photos of the babies born in Fallujah since the massive use of depleted uranium there?

The US does not give a damn about Syrian civilians, and the upcoming "intervention" is going to kill thousands of them.

This situation is very complex...Iran is the real target, then it is on to Russia and China.

Mr. Obama does not have my OK to ignite World War Three.

BTW, 70% of the Syrian people support Assad, and most of the so-called "rebels" are foreigners who are being paid by Saudi Arabia. It is NOT a civil war. It is a proxy war between the West and Russia, and the aim is to deprive Russia of an advantage in oil trade by building a pipeline through Syria.

We sure are lucky that we elected Obama instead of one of those republican war mongers! Those nasty old corporations have no influence on Obama. And don't forget, this is the most transparent administration that we have ever had!

P.S. See Mr. NSA, I didn't say anything bad about our mother government. 😉

Is The Obama Administration the Most Corrupt in U.S. History?
"This is how institutionalized corruption operates. But President Obama didn't have to sign this bill; he supposedly represented the public, not the people on Capitol Hill; he could simply have vetoed it, and given that vetoing-event the same TV-fanfare exposure he had given to his signing of the STOCK Act a year earlier; this would have been a very popular thing for him to do, and it would have been in keeping with all of his campaign rhetoric, upon the basis of which he had won the White House. But corruption has instead been rampant during his Presidency; and his decisions - both personnel and policy - have largely assisted that, as happened here: he chose to help corrupt members of Congress."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/is-the-obama-administrati_2_b_3094454.html

It's a good thing that he got his Nobel Prize before anyone got to really know him!
For me the Nobel Prize is a worthless political acknowledgement of corruption.

the sad thing I see as I walk around my office, are the shrines dedicated to Obama, multiple pictures, calendars, posters... it's almost a religious mania.

I often wonder how politically aware these people are & marvel at how racist these displays seem to be (just because of the color of his skin he is afforded (at least minor) deity like status... that seems to qualify as racism to me).

were those people to understand how the current administration has handled the reigns (heh..) I think the violation & betrayal would be crushing.