The debate "Going to war to stop killing is utterly redundant" was started by
June 18, 2016, 11:20 pm.
7 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 9 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
citizenzero posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
Nemiroff posted 6 arguments, RogueAmerican posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
citizenzero, SwaggerPoptart and 5 visitors agree.
Nemiroff, RogueAmerican, xaveragexjoesx, moneybagboyz and 5 visitors disagree.
the difference is that Iraqis never asked for our help, and clearly did nothing to help themselves. Syrians made reasonable demand, they didn't want assad to quit, just better treatment. just as we did of the crown England. they both said no and just like us they got up and fought for their rights and for 5 years refused to give up.
these people truly want change. and their dictator is far worse than England (was to us). we should help them.
that clearly not true in the case of syria. the people revolted on their own during the Arab spring. the 5 year (?) long civil war is where isis was born and prospered.
it's in the name. the Islamic state of Syria and the levant. (originally ISIL)
To overthrow Middle Eastern dictators is. Saddam was a lesson in destabilization, and proof that the only stability in the region is out of powerful dictatorships.
where do you get your information from?
the majority of Russian targets weren't even ISIS, but the very groups we were trying to support. russias goal was never to defeat isis, but to protect their ally, assad.
want proof? Russia withdrew declaring mission accomplished yet ISIS is still alive and kicking in syria, whereas their ally no longer needs to negotiate with the rebels. so what was their mission?
I think you may be getting spoon fed your information sorry to say. Russias first day had Isis scattering in fear. something we hadn't managed to do whatsoever. within a month they cut of more than one supply route and had bombed an amunitiions building. they did more in that small span than we did in 2 years.
yeah, I remember hearing a report. we recruited a handful. but we didn't help them much, and then Russia joined the fight.
I'm on the side of intervention in syria. to prevent ww3 we may have to stop Russia in syria. and assad is insane.
if you don't recall in 2011 when we began our intervention in their civil war we were there to help the rebels. but Isis was also fighting Syrian forces. it goes unsaid that Isis and the rebels were synonymous and whether or not they were the ones we were assisting was never clarified
not true. the people of Syria are already fighting their dictator.
we would be supporting the people, not invading them as we did with saddam.
the death of a Brutish dictator is a single death and not a war but we are incapable of making it so simple. either way killing Assad will accomplish as much as killing bin Laden. it will accomplish as much as it did Hussein. and it will accomplish as much as it did when we killed the dictator before him
so how do you suggest stopping a brutal dictator like assad?