What is the risk of doing nothing? - Page 3

 Carlin
I have said what i think is right and what i think should be done, I admit it means nothing just my thoughts on it i wish i were in the postition to do more for those people, But you keep on critizising me for what i say and others, So i ask you for the third time, have you ever done your duty to your country, i do not want to know where or what just have you served just have you done your bit? Secondly as i said keep pulling me up on every post i make so let us all here WHAT you think should be done in this sad situation and how you think it should be solved or at least what action your country should take and others who agree with your country. do not fob it off just answer the questions the same as i have done
Steve1

If my military tour (or lack thereof), were relevant to the conversation, I would entertain answering the question. 

let us all here WHAT you think should be done in this sad situation and how you think it should be solved or at least what action your country should take and others who agree with your country.

Firstly, whatever is done (by the US) ought be done with a majority vote of Congress, if for no other reason but the sanctity of the process (I am no more confident in the expression of the will of the people through Congress than you are of yours through Parliament). 

Secondly, if the US does anything at all, it should be done within the confines of the UN Security council.  Now, some would say that immediately precludes any action at all, suiting my purpose quite nicely.  While that may be true, and while I am not at all a fan of the UN, and the undermining of the sovereignty of independent nations (ie my complete opposition to the recent UN Arms Treaty popular in Europe), the world powers have agreed to discourse in that forum.  We cannot conveniently ignore the council immediately, only to return to it later for matters of ceremony.  The first thing that comes to mind is the cooperation of Russia and China that we all feel we should be able to rely upon when it comes to N. Korea, let's say.

Lastly, the difficulty in the public forming a proper opinion rests on the idea that the information we are fed is accurate, and comprehensive.  I have mentioned before that our governments enjoy the practice of withholding "sensitive" information due to matters of "national security".  While this is undoubtedly plausible at times, one must question at what point information is withheld (or propagated) to manipulate public opinion to a particular end.  Likely, the idea centers on ideologies automatically ascribed to us.  We lack the opportunity, for instance, to willingly sacrifice a measure of wealth, power, and influence in keeping with our moral and ethical values.  Sadly, the idea that I, as a US citizen, have a right to (subsequently demanding) cheap Middle-Eastern oil (traded in US dollars no less) at any and all expense is not one I remember coming across in our founding documents.  The actions of this government (and yours), over time and regardless of party, speak to a very different reality, dating back to Iran in 1953 (ring a bell ?) .  I say all that to say, that where you find yourself today, is at a stage in a circular process in which we create problems (the mechanisms of which are largely under-reported), only to then turn on CNN or BBC and to find enormous and glaring headlines staring us in the face of why we simply must "come to the aid of"  a foreign peoples under extreme duress (that we really care nothing for).  My solution?  Let's just say I've had enough of the tail wagging the dog, and I think it's time to start dealing with the sickness, instead of masking the symptoms.  If that means I pay $10.00/gallon for gas/petrol like you do, then so be it.

Obama already said that destroying the actual chemicals is not an option, it would be too dangerous: the fallout. Also, "no boots on the ground." His self-limiting capacity in the matters of execution of war is beginning to astound me, I must admit.

I think the idea is to create infrastructure setbacks that prevent immediate mobility of use in the deadly gas. I watched G. Stephanopoulos on TV this morning interviewing Kerry:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/09/john-kerry-we-are-not-going-to-lose-vote-authorizing-syria-military-action/

Or, that is the excuse being used. It is quite a disappointment for the Syrian rebels who aren't too thrilled with how this strategy  supposedly helps them. 
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57600872/syrian-rebels-missile-strikes-of-limited-use-to-us/

The military guy pretty much got a glazed look about him when looking for his motivation, based on the evidence of dead and suffering children and others. He certainly acknowledged from the military command point of view— they know blowing up a bridge isn't going to stop the Syrian people from killing each other whether they use poison gas, or other deadly means.

People keep talking about the "red line" that was crossed. That President Bashar al-Assad ​ taunts Obama. 
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/02/us/politics/obamas-red-line-comes-back-to-haunt-him.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/sunday-review/tripping-on-his-own-red-line.html?_r=0

---

Carlin,
I wish there was a third choice to tell you the truth. Hillary drives me nuts, always has. LOL I do think, however, she would have answered the question. That John Kerry, whose position demands that he should be the one always thinking of consequences, would not, or could not share such a scenario when asked, is a confidence buster. Also, you said:

...the difficulty in the public forming a proper opinion rests on the idea that the information we are fed is accurate, and comprehensive

 

Accurate information in the information age is becoming an oxymoron in itself. And not just in the politic arena. The economic arena, too. If it were really as simple as everyone paying 10 bucks a gallon for gas. We are almost half way there! For instance, I actually hate the whole coupon idea.  And loss leader sales, BOGO's all those gimmicks. I wish we could just trust value as something universal. 

 

Carlin
Thanks for the comprehensive breakdown of events past and present, You are correct in one thing and that is what we are told by the powers to be and is it the truth, I do not think for one minute the truth is told half the time. and i certainly know that certain things said by governments are a cover up for some other thing,s and i will say no more but it has been proved to me in the past; I did catch a part of the News over here this evening and they said there maybe a vote in Congress so that will mean no immediate action taken by the USA for the time being, However what about the French as far as i know they are still going to do something about it. But on there own i really do not think so.
Steve1

Okay, I think I am finally putting this together? Steve1 says the French are still talking about going ahead, presumably to execute punishment on sheer principle, without the UN. And Carlin says, if only we will pay 10 bucks a gallon to stop the slaughter?

(The French are probably oil-tied with Syria in an unbalanced way,  is my guess without out checking more facts....)

I said, Obama, drew a line, and it was crossed, wasn't it? Our collective emotional buttons aren't working the same expected way, so there is a bit of uncertainty that makes— pyramid toppers, feel a breeze.

 

And Carlin says, if only we will pay 10 bucks a gallon to stop the slaughter?

If I didn't know better I'd think you were misquoting me Bee. 


Obama has mastered the art of momentum, vital to success in today's political environment.  As the leader, he knows that in order to execute properly, he has to surf on the crest of the wave to remain effective.  The problem comes in where he gets a little too far ahead, and realizes there's nothing beneath him. 

Carlin
You are correct we are paying nearly 10 dollars for a gallon of fuel for the Car and around 1,188 dollars for a 1000 L of household heating oil; and that is going up certainly now because of the problems we have been talking about in other countries.
Steve1
For me Mr Obama has done the right thing by holding back and not taking the Gung Ho method and possibly a vote in Congress on the matter, Mr Cameron did the correct thing but was way too quick to recall the M.P,s from there summer break; A great pity he did not hold off for another week things may have toured out differently then, but it is the traitors in his own party that need to be dealt with first and foremost. Now let us see where the French stand on this, I think i know what they will do, Absolutely nothing, They are followers not leaders now and always have been.

How's this for a plausible scenario, for why the question was put so
early ?

Cameron was under pressure from all sides to recall the
House early and "do something" about Syria.

He also knows there is a large, probably majority, concensus
in the UK against being dragged into yet another war.
Something the people's Representatives in Parliament also know.

So he cynically tries for an early vote, knowing he will 'lose' it,  so
that when the Tory Government take a second vote, after the UN
findings, they can get more MPs from all Parties  to vote For
armed intervention this time;  then Cameron can cheerfully say:
"See, I'm not like Tony Blair,  I don't just follow America into battle;
I listened, and I accepted that the House tried not to push us into taking
action that you the public didn't want, but now we have some inspection
results we can rely on, so we can all justify going in."

[Obama may have SNAFU'd Cameron's predictions, at least temporarily.]

The Liberals Deputy PM is currently arguing against such a 2nd
vote being taken;  I think that is a politician's manouvre, also.

They all want to score credibility points more than they care about dead
Syrians or anyone else.