Skip to main content

View Diary: BREAKING: Russia denies supplying Syria with NEW attack helicopters (57 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The people of the world should demand (3+ / 0-)

    an end to all state-sanctioned violence.

    No, I would not endorse neither of those two statements.

    The people of the world should be demanding more information.  They should be demanding truly independent investigations into the credible allegations that western countries have been arming the opposition groups in Syria in order to ACCELERATE the atrocity and create a bigger humanitarian-shaped fig leaf for military intervention.

    None of this is to excuse Syria's barbaric actions, and you can frankly go to hell for having made that insinuation throughout your comment sections.  The point is that no condemnation that comes out of Hillary Clinton or any other American foreign policy mouthpiece is to be trusted as
    a) credible
    b) humanitarian, or
    c) based on moral authority.

    America only gets involved in stuff on behalf of corporations.  This has ALWAYS been the case, and when it's not selectively picking which REAL atrocity to make money fighting, it will actually INVENT an atrocity to get involved in.

    To suggest that the U.S. is advocating for humanitarianism NOW instead of profit-seeking is to somehow think that the past 200 years of American policy is SUDDENLY different.

    Oppose Assad and the actions of his government.  I'm with you on that.  But I oppose the "free army" as well.  I am for the people of Syria to live in peace.  And it is THAT distinction that you never make in your pro-humanitarian intervention pieces, and it is decidedly NOT the position of the U.S. Government.  If it were, then the calls would simply be for an end to violence and not a demand for Assad to step down.

    The bourgeoisie had better watch out for me, all throughout this so called nation. We don't want your filthy money, we don't need your innocent bloodshed, we just want to end your world. ~H.R.

    by chipmo on Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 12:24:07 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I only cited Clinton on the question of Russian (0+ / 0-)

      helicopters for Syria. She no doubt has access to such info via US intel assets, including sates. She no doubt made this info public because it looks bad for the Russians. Everything she say isn't a lie.

      Is she lying about Russia attack helicopters headed for Syria? The Russian response would indicated that she is not. That is the subject of this diary, the other stuff you bring up are smoke and mirrors.

      Where do you think the FSA came from. What do you think the soldiers that have deserted Assad are doing?

      simply be for an end to violence and not a demand for Assad to step down.
      Not demand that Assad step down? That's your position and you say you are not pro-Assad? Syrian peaceful protests started March 15, 2011 to demand precisely that. He has murdered thousands for simply making this demand.

      No, Assad is a cold blooded mass murderer who is still killing as we write. My demand is no longer that Assad step down, my demand, and it is echoed by people around the world, is that Assad be put down.

      Remember history, Clay Claiborne, Director Vietnam: American Holocaust - narrated by Martin Sheen

      by Clay Claiborne on Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 01:06:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I have to go, and I don't have time (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        protectspice, BigAlinWashSt

        to argue much more of this on behalf of the audience(obviously I'm not arguing to change YOUR mind because you like American military aggression), but

        I only cited Clinton on the question of Russian helicopters for Syria.
        The dialogue between Clinton and Russia is the CENTRAL POINT of your diary, not just a minor citation.  It is the credibility of one of the two parties that are the CORE of this diary that people object to, not opposition to the actions of the Syrian army.
        Not demand that Assad step down? That's your position and you say you are not pro-Assad?
        Yes, and the fact that you conflate the two position just shows how unable and unwilling you are to talk about policy without becoming a straw-man erecting asshole.  Demanding that violence ends with NO OTHER CONDITIONS is a way to protect life.  Assad is a dictator.  Telling a dictator to ABDICATE POWER is clearly not a demand that is expected to be obeyed.  And by putting the demand that Clinton knows will not be met forward, she gets her justification for war AND the fig leaf of "trying diplomacy" at the same time.

        How can the demand that Assad be "put down" be met with less loss of Syrian life than a simple, unconditional demand that violence stop?

        Answer or don't.  I don't care to read your justifications for bloodletting wrapped in fake concern for small people anymore.

        The bourgeoisie had better watch out for me, all throughout this so called nation. We don't want your filthy money, we don't need your innocent bloodshed, we just want to end your world. ~H.R.

        by chipmo on Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 01:24:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site