Skip to main content

View Diary: Why I support authorizing the President to use military force in Syria (186 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It does make some difference (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    seanwright, newinfluence, Hey338Too

    Maybe not to the dead person, but to human civilization.

    As horrible as any killing or any war is, we have adopted rules that set the outer perimeters of what the international system believe is morally permissible conduct. The use of nuclear weapons is certainly frowned on. Would you not agree that the world cannot tolerate a government that uses those weapons in today's world? Notwithstanding whether you might accept the US's right to strike at Iran to knock out a nuclear weapon program, you must surely agree that if Iran used a nuclear weapon against Israel, that the US would be forced into a massive military response.

    Are nuclear weapons worse than chemical munitions as WMD? More lethal, to be sure, but they're much less likely to be used for a host of reasons. With poison gas, forces can kill the opposition in large numbers and then occupy the land in short order. There are reasons why there is a separate convention to prohibit chemical munitions, even though attacking civilians is prohibited under original Geneva rules.

    Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

    by FischFry on Fri Sep 06, 2013 at 01:59:07 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site