Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Division on Syria

YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 7:26:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I've heard a lot of characterizations/explanations of why some people think that other people have one opinion on what the United States ought to do or not. So, I'd like to clarify where DDO stands. I'm interested in:

(1) What do you think we should do about Syria? Why?
(2) What do you think are the reasons that those who do not share your perspective on Syria have for their perspective?
(3) Who do you think should make the call of what is done in Syria?/What will be the implications of doing or not doing what you think should be done?

I really want to know what all of you think. Don't be afraid of anyone arguing with you, or challenging your perspective because I, at least, won't -and I'm probably the most outspoken member on this subject here.

This is your chance. I don't care what your educational background or even factual understanding of the situation is. I just want to know what your opinion is. Is that agreeable?
Tsar of DDO
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 7:53:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/31/2013 7:26:35 PM, YYW wrote:
I've heard a lot of characterizations/explanations of why some people think that other people have one opinion on what the United States ought to do or not. So, I'd like to clarify where DDO stands. I'm interested in:

(1) What do you think we should do about Syria? Why?

I think we should continue our strong diplomatic opposition to Syria, with the POSSIBLE introduction of sanctions via appropriate channels (ie, UNGA or UNSC).

(2) What do you think are the reasons that those who do not share your perspective on Syria have for their perspective?

Well, I completely understand why people would think differently. For many, the Syrian government has gone far too far and has essentially moved into the zone of being an abuser of human rights. This makes it the duty of the international community to intervene.

(3) Who do you think should make the call of what is done in Syria?/What will be the implications of doing or not doing what you think should be done?

I think that the decisionmaking on what to do with Syria should be done either through international consensus, or, preferably, the United Nations.

I think by not following my "advice," if you will, there will be an implication that it is the duty of "first world countries" to intervene in human rights abuses militarily, and that in essence the business of anywhere with such abuses is the business of the entire world.

By following my advice, I think there will be an implication that countries should not send their men and women off to die unless done so for the immediate defense of the country - in other words, the Syrian situation is a proper civil war, and one that should not be acted on at that. Further, there will be an implication that international channels, namely the United Nations and international agreements, should be the primary means of dealing with potential human rights issues versus policing the world individually.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 7:55:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/31/2013 7:53:47 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 8/31/2013 7:26:35 PM, YYW wrote:
I've heard a lot of characterizations/explanations of why some people think that other people have one opinion on what the United States ought to do or not. So, I'd like to clarify where DDO stands. I'm interested in:

(1) What do you think we should do about Syria? Why?

I think we should continue our strong diplomatic opposition to Syria, with the POSSIBLE introduction of sanctions via appropriate channels (ie, UNGA or UNSC).

(2) What do you think are the reasons that those who do not share your perspective on Syria have for their perspective?

Well, I completely understand why people would think differently. For many, the Syrian government has gone far too far and has essentially moved into the zone of being an abuser of human rights. This makes it the duty of the international community to intervene.

(3) Who do you think should make the call of what is done in Syria?/What will be the implications of doing or not doing what you think should be done?

I think that the decisionmaking on what to do with Syria should be done either through international consensus, or, preferably, the United Nations.

I think by not following my "advice," if you will, there will be an implication that it is the duty of "first world countries" to intervene in human rights abuses militarily, and that in essence the business of anywhere with such abuses is the business of the entire world.

By following my advice, I think there will be an implication that countries should not send their men and women off to die unless done so for the immediate defense of the country - in other words, the Syrian situation is a proper civil war, and one that should not be acted on at that. Further, there will be an implication that international channels, namely the United Nations and international agreements, should be the primary means of dealing with potential human rights issues versus policing the world individually.

Allright, that was a very well articulated perspective. I'll look forward to seeing others.
Tsar of DDO
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 11:11:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/31/2013 7:53:47 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 8/31/2013 7:26:35 PM, YYW wrote:
I've heard a lot of characterizations/explanations of why some people think that other people have one opinion on what the United States ought to do or not. So, I'd like to clarify where DDO stands. I'm interested in:

(1) What do you think we should do about Syria? Why?

I think we should continue our strong diplomatic opposition to Syria, with the POSSIBLE introduction of sanctions via appropriate channels (ie, UNGA or UNSC).

(2) What do you think are the reasons that those who do not share your perspective on Syria have for their perspective?

Well, I completely understand why people would think differently. For many, the Syrian government has gone far too far and has essentially moved into the zone of being an abuser of human rights. This makes it the duty of the international community to intervene.

Yeah, just like we did when Russia slaughtered 100,000 in Chechnya, or when China flooded Xinjiang and Tibet with Han Chinese settlers. Wait, literally nothing happened? Oh well. Maybe we should reinvade Iraq to stop the thousands dying in sectarian violence.

(3) Who do you think should make the call of what is done in Syria?/What will be the implications of doing or not doing what you think should be done?

I think that the decisionmaking on what to do with Syria should be done either through international consensus, or, preferably, the United Nations.

Yeah, because Russia, being a permanent security council member, will gladly cooperate with the US and Europe on issues such as these. Obviously China will be happy to do what is best for the Syrian people as well.
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2013 5:18:25 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
(1) What do you think we should do about Syria? Why?

Pretty much nothing.

(2) What do you think are the reasons that those who do not share your perspective on Syria have for their perspective?

"Assad used chemical weapons. He is a stain to the world."

(3) Who do you think should make the call of what is done in Syria?/What will be the implications of doing or not doing what you think should be done?

The Rebels.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2013 6:20:31 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/31/2013 11:11:42 PM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
At 8/31/2013 7:53:47 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 8/31/2013 7:26:35 PM, YYW wrote:
I've heard a lot of characterizations/explanations of why some people think that other people have one opinion on what the United States ought to do or not. So, I'd like to clarify where DDO stands. I'm interested in:

(1) What do you think we should do about Syria? Why?

I think we should continue our strong diplomatic opposition to Syria, with the POSSIBLE introduction of sanctions via appropriate channels (ie, UNGA or UNSC).

(2) What do you think are the reasons that those who do not share your perspective on Syria have for their perspective?

Well, I completely understand why people would think differently. For many, the Syrian government has gone far too far and has essentially moved into the zone of being an abuser of human rights. This makes it the duty of the international community to intervene.

Yeah, just like we did when Russia slaughtered 100,000 in Chechnya, or when China flooded Xinjiang and Tibet with Han Chinese settlers. Wait, literally nothing happened? Oh well. Maybe we should reinvade Iraq to stop the thousands dying in sectarian violence.

(3) Who do you think should make the call of what is done in Syria?/What will be the implications of doing or not doing what you think should be done?

I think that the decisionmaking on what to do with Syria should be done either through international consensus, or, preferably, the United Nations.

Yeah, because Russia, being a permanent security council member, will gladly cooperate with the US and Europe on issues such as these. Obviously China will be happy to do what is best for the Syrian people as well.

Excuse me? What is your ACTUAL opinion/what do you THINK my opinion is? Because you just condescended to me from BOTH sides of the issue.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
DeFool
Posts: 626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2013 3:44:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/31/2013 7:26:35 PM, YYW wrote:
I've heard a lot of characterizations/explanations of why some people think that other people have one opinion on what the United States ought to do or not. So, I'd like to clarify where DDO stands. I'm interested in:

(1) What do you think we should do about Syria? Why?
(2) What do you think are the reasons that those who do not share your perspective on Syria have for their perspective?
(3) Who do you think should make the call of what is done in Syria?/What will be the implications of doing or not doing what you think should be done?

I really want to know what all of you think. Don't be afraid of anyone arguing with you, or challenging your perspective because I, at least, won't -and I'm probably the most outspoken member on this subject here.


1. The US must work with the international community to provide humanitarian relief to the Syrian people. This help cannot wait.

2. I am curious about this, myself. My hunch is that some want military action for altruistic reasons.

3. The US Congress must authorize the use of force, and must allocate funding for any response. This decision will be made by campaign donors, not the congressmen and women themselves... and especially not the American or Syrian people. These donors will make the decision to continue to fund political careers based on how closely the Congressmen and Women obey.
slo1
Posts: 4,346
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2013 9:31:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/31/2013 7:26:35 PM, YYW wrote:
I've heard a lot of characterizations/explanations of why some people think that other people have one opinion on what the United States ought to do or not. So, I'd like to clarify where DDO stands. I'm interested in:

(1) What do you think we should do about Syria? Why?
(2) What do you think are the reasons that those who do not share your perspective on Syria have for their perspective?
(3) Who do you think should make the call of what is done in Syria?/What will be the implications of doing or not doing what you think should be done?

I really want to know what all of you think. Don't be afraid of anyone arguing with you, or challenging your perspective because I, at least, won't -and I'm probably the most outspoken member on this subject here.

This is your chance. I don't care what your educational background or even factual understanding of the situation is. I just want to know what your opinion is. Is that agreeable?

This administration was caught with the Yemen government lying to the Yemen people that bombs falling from the sky were from Yemen airplanes and not American drones.

How anyone could trust their accusation against the Syrian govt is beyond me. I want evidence from some other governments (plural) that Assad is the guy who used the gas.
Liberalismisinsanity
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2013 10:14:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I think Assad is better because while he might be backed by Iran, AT LEAST THEY AREN'T BACKED BY AL-QAEDA!
~Brony and proud
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2013 11:24:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/31/2013 7:26:35 PM, YYW wrote:

(1) What do you think we should do about Syria? Why?

I'm not sure what kind of realistic prescriptions I could offer other than a bunch of negatives. I don't trust regime displacement/replacement, bombing any actual chemical weapons centers doesn't appear tenable (wind factor possibly affecting civilians), I don't like that kind of principle to begin with (US as international arbiter), etc.

(2) What do you think are the reasons that those who do not share your perspective on Syria have for their perspective?

There are probably a host of reasons. Many people would accept the idea that by having as much influence/strength as the US has, the US is obligated to use that for humanitarian principles. Moreover, the actions by Assad's regime appear nothing short of monstrous. Basically, the situation is bad and the US has the ability to (arguably) put an end to it.

(3) Who do you think should make the call of what is done in Syria?/What will be the implications of doing or not doing what you think should be done?

Ideally I'd prefer some level of international consensus. The UK opposing involvement + Russia/China voicing strong opposition takes that away (though I realistically don't care what the latter two have to say on it). It's just important from the perspective of UN involvement. If not international, then I'd at least prefer national consensus which, from what I've seen, isn't at all there.

I don't have enough knowledge to predict what will/would happen so I won't resort to that. I have no high level of research/expertise to draw on here.
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.