Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Would the U.S. government allow an armed group, supported militarily by Russia, China or Iran to take up arms and overthrow the government in the name of government reform? Of course not. So, why does the U.S. condemn and criticize Assad and the Syrian government for taking the same action that it would take against a group of armed thugs hell-bent on taking over the government.
Is this another case of U.S. foreign policy hypocricy?
Last edited by dorado0359; 03-14-2012 at 09:19 AM..
Reason: ...
If the US government started bombing/oppressing its citizens, I don't see why Americans would simply take it and sit at home. As for the international community, it just may be time to consider extending help. In fact, this land has seen its share of foreign involvement, going back to... American Revolution.
How you go about doing something, is where the key lies. As in... the details.
Would the U.S. government allow an armed group, supported militarily by Russia, China or Iran to take up arms and overthrow the government in the name of government reform? Of course not. So, why does the U.S. condemn and criticize Assad and the Syrian government for taking the same action that it would take against a group of armed thugs hell-bent on taking over the government.
Is this another case of U.S. foreign policy hypocricy?
Would the U.S. government allow an armed group, supported militarily by Russia, China or Iran to take up arms and overthrow the government in the name of government reform? Of course not. So, why does the U.S. condemn and criticize Assad and the Syrian government for taking the same action that it would take against a group of armed thugs hell-bent on taking over the government.
Is this another case of U.S. foreign policy hypocricy?
Sure it is.
The only reason Syria is in the news is not because it's a dictatorship (that's of course true) , but it's a government that doesn't toe the line for US/Israeli interests.
Yemen, Egyptian, Saudi Arabian dictators were/still are good allies with the USA.
When the USA talks Democracy...they are just blowing smoke.
If the US government started bombing/oppressing its citizens, I don't see why Americans would simply take it and sit at home. As for the international community, it just may be time to consider extending help. In fact, this land has seen its share of foreign involvement, going back to... American Revolution.
How you go about doing something, is where the key lies. As in... the details.
What does "extending help" mean?
Do you really want them to intervene, using force, to promote your "good outcome"?
Do you really want them to intervene, using force, to promote your "good outcome"?
As I said, the key is in the details. Defining "good outcome" would be a good start. Or at the very least, could we use the French help during American Revolution as an example of a good outcome?
Would the U.S. government allow an armed group, supported militarily by Russia, China or Iran to take up arms and overthrow the government in the name of government reform? Of course not. So, why does the U.S. condemn and criticize Assad and the Syrian government for taking the same action that it would take against a group of armed thugs hell-bent on taking over the government.
Is this another case of U.S. foreign policy hypocricy?
In a word, yes! Picking sides in a civil war, specificially the side opposing the legitimate government of that country, is an act of war. We should have the guts to say so, not hide behind the skirts of the UN or some international coalition.
There are very, very few times when US intervention in the internal affairs of other countries is justified, either morally or in benifit to this country. Yet there are lots of times when we have done so that it has cost us. Either in terms of lost American lives and treasure, creating new enemies or loss of any kind of moral high ground. There are very few places and incidents where the loss of lives of American servicemen and women is justified.
The U.S. Wouldn't Allow An Armed Takeover Of The Government,....
Would the U.S. government allow an armed group, supported militarily by Russia, China or Iran to take up arms and overthrow the government in the name of government reform? Of course not. So, why does the U.S. condemn and criticize Assad and the Syrian government for taking the same action that it would take against a group of armed thugs hell-bent on taking over the government.
Is this another case of U.S. foreign policy hypocricy?
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants"
Writing to William Smith (1755-1816), John Adams' secretary and future son-in-law, Thomas Jefferson seemed to welcome Shays' Rebellion in Massachusetts: "god forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion . . . the tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. it is it's natural manure." Jefferson was confident that rather than repression, the "remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them."
-----------
"Rebellion to tyrants is
obedience to God"
On July 4, 1776, in addition to approving the Declaration of Independence, Congress chose Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin to design a great seal for the new country. Franklin proposed the phrase "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God," a sentiment Jefferson heartily embraced and included in the design for the Virginia seal and sometimes stamped it on the wax seals of his own letters. Although Congress rejected the elaborate seal, it retained the words "E Pluribus Unum," which became the country's motto.
I really doubt many are confused on what Syria is doing in shooting unarmed protectors.
The United States was guilty of the same thing. So don't let me to start posting videos of the U.S. beating, shooting and letting loose attack dogs on unarmed black civil rights protestors during the 60's.
Last edited by dorado0359; 03-14-2012 at 11:14 AM..
Reason: ...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
