Syria

[Stephie_Girl]

It's funny, we get involved in places we shouldn't and avoid areas we should be involved in. 

[Nort]

The U.S should stick to the mentality they had in WW1 and WW2; "It's their problem, not ours."

[ivhyn]

I think neither America nor Great Britain should intervene in Syria. It possibly makes more damage than it helps. Anyways, it's unacceptable to use poison gas.

I wonder what Mr Putin, the peacekeeper of internetfreedom, has to say about a possible attack.

[gastew15]

Although it may not be the best thing to do, I think people forget that America had the role of Policeman of the world handed to them, they didn't take it. The other main players at the time gave the US the job, so if they want somebody to complain to they might as well take some of the blame to, since sorry to say it folks, but America's not the only country in the world that does unfavorable things. I defiantly don't agree with every choice they make, but if you do with any country you're either lying or dumb. ( You should complain about the topic at hand, not how bad the country is, and blah blah, because it makes you more of an ass than anyone as you're just doing the same thing they are. )

 

[ Might as well add that I actually plan to leave the US after I graduate anyways, so other than possibly the NSA coming to arrest me I don't really have any reason to go Yea America or anything, so don't go accusing me of that. ]

[Nort]

Although it may not be the best thing to do, I think people forget that America had the role of Policeman of the world handed to them, they didn't take it. The other main players at the time gave the US the job, so if they want somebody to complain to they might as well take some of the blame to, since sorry to say it folks, but America's not the only country in the world that does unfavorable things. I defiantly don't agree with every choice they make, but if you do with any country you're either lying or dumb. ( You should complain about the topic at hand, not how bad the country is, and blah blah, because it makes you more of an ass than anyone as you're just doing the same thing they are. )

 

I'm not saying that what you said is untrue. However, can you explain what you mean by "America had the role of Policeman of the world handed to them"? 

[gastew15]

I'm not saying that what you said is untrue. However, can you explain what you mean by "America had the role of Policeman of the world handed to them"? 

It really falls back to WW2 & WW1 ( Two wars the US tried to stay out of as much as they possible could ) ( sorry I know that's like the most talked about part of history ever.. Plus America ) America had already  been called in to save the day in WW1 ( Not exactly save the day, but that's pretty much what it was cutting out a lot of details ) Then you have pretty much all of Europe about to fall until the US comes in to save the day again.  That doesn't have too much to do with it other than it makes them seem like a good choice, since they've already " Saved " the " World " twice... So when The UN finally becomes a real thing after the League of Nations had previously failed ( actually the reason it failed was because the US didn't back it Ironically enough ) So the US steps up to take the lead of the UN after other country's try to get them to. ( At least the closest thing to a global police force.. Not saying it actually works )  So the other country's put the US as the head of the UN pretty much, and then makes it where most of the UN force are US soldiers, but then later on they expect them to not become a global police force( Since the UN doesn't really do anything due to the terribleness of it, but that's a different discussion ) ?  Pretty much all wars from then on out for a while are all stuff the US didn't want to be in ... Korea, and Vietnam ( French boned us into that one ), but then all of the sudden, we realize well hell, seems like it's our job now so why not! Bolivia, Somali, Iraq, Iraq again, Afghanistan why not?  It's kind of a shitty situation even for them is all...    * THIS IS A LONG POST!!!

 

Some of it is poorly explained due to the interest of time, and my keyboard.

Plus it's not all necessarily like that completely, but that's pretty much it in the eyes of the US at the time, so it's only logical that's what they

did..  ( The US would have started something similar by them selves though, it just so happened they were asked to. The US was going to attack Japan even if they didn't bomb pearl harbor in a few years anyways, and they would've found a few more fights here and there; although,  that's all heresy now... )

[gastew15]

History is just mostly messed up good intentions of others that leads to destruction, and more warped ideas into a spiral hidden by nice talk, and a few rounds of the blame game sadly..

 

Edit :  Also, America is most likely doomed to a terrible end with their two party system of useless bickering and failure, turning into a police state for " safety ", and other impending doom... RIP America, you died so young..

 

I may have to ban myself from any more political discussions in the future.

[Nort]

-Snip-

 

Some of it is poorly explained due to the interest of time, and my keyboard.

Plus it's not all necessarily like that completely, but that's pretty much it in the eyes of the US at the time, so it's only logical that's what they

did..  ( The US would have started something similar by them selves though, it just so happened they were asked to. The US was going to attack Japan even if they didn't bomb pearl harbor in a few years anyways, and they would've found a few more fights here and there; although,  that's all heresy now... )

 

The U.S was not called upon in either war. In WW1 the U.S stayed back, selling supplies to both sides. Germany, scared that the U.S would eventually join, tried to convince Mexico to attack the U.S. German U-Boats also sank the Lusitania, a cruise ship full of American citizens. This is what triggered them to enter in 1917. This was almost the same in WW2 except that the U.S blatantly put their support behind the Allies, only selling supplies to them and even putting a trade embargo on Japan. The embargo is believed to be the reason for the attack on Pearl Harbor.

 

However, I do agree with you. Considering the U.S is the strongest military power currently, it is natural that they assume the position of the "world police". 

[Seldszar]

All I can say is that being the world police or not, they shouldnt try to enforce that title. Being the strongest military doesn't implicitely mean you have to police the world. It just means you are there if people need you. Imo coming to help because someone desperately needs you is a lot better than going in and be the bad guy. It might be only "appearances" but imo its an important distinction.

[gastew15]

The U.S was not called upon in either war. In WW1 the U.S stayed back, selling supplies to both sides. Germany, scared that the U.S would eventually join, tried to convince Mexico to attack the U.S. German U-Boats also sank the Lusitania, a cruise ship full of American citizens. This is what triggered them to enter in 1917. This was almost the same in WW2 except that the U.S blatantly put their support behind the Allies, only selling supplies to them and even putting a trade embargo on Japan. The embargo is believed to be the reason for the attack on Pearl Harbor.

 

However, I do agree with you. Considering the U.S is the strongest military power currently, it is natural that they assume the position of the "world police". 

Yep pretty much, I didn't really pay attention to the fact that I did make it sound very pro American, which I did try to do in parts, but it was a little over the top from the subtle bit I wanted in it. I tried to make it in the view of how American leaders at the time would see it, but if I would've put more effort into telling in a more broad way that's what I'd add, along with a few other bits. Plus I'm pretty sure they had already wanted to go into fight, and others had asked of them to, but the population was too much against it until said events. Plus the Zimmerman note was so stupid that I really question the legitimacy of it when it's brought up. Regardless, they were shoved into a direction of becoming an ass of themselves, and sadly that's why I'm not really a big supporter of the US anymore, other than at least saying it's not all their own fault.

[Torg73]

If Britain does got involved it could help push Scotland to Vote Independence next year, hope we don't get involved in yet another pointless war, we are still fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan

[ConfusedDolphin]

Everyone needs to stay out of that mess, especially as we dont even have the facts of the situation entirely lined up yet. Military actions will escalate into a much worse situation. 

[X50CalSniperX]

If this has any truth to it... http://www.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/copyrightWrapper/watermark.php?display=trueℑ=http://bp3.uuuploads.com/fun-maps/fun-maps-32.jpg Hope things don't get out of hand...

[FireFox]

We won't have WW3 and Japan probably won't side with Syria anyway.

 

 

[TheMail]

China and the US will never have a war, we rely on eachother way too much 

 

Also Korea can't do shit 

Pardon? South Korea ALONE is #8 in the world for position of firepower

[naca1227]

Pardon? South Korea ALONE is #8 in the world for position of firepower

I meant North, but ok 

[piplupgao]

Time to move to Canada

[crazystorm13]

I would be very worried if Russia gets involved.

[Ngrungebb91]

We won't have WW3 and Japan probably won't side with Syria anyway.

 

Don't say that man. Its VERY likely a world war can occur out of small stuff like this. All the U.S. needs to do is start attacking Syrian troops then if Putin will do what he threatens ( which i'm sure he would ) he will send troops down there to attack the Americans. BOOM we have a war right there. U.S.A and the European Union vs Russia, Iran, North Korea, Rebels, unknown enemies i'm sure and China is a VERY gray area.. there is so much business between the U.S. and China it would be really difficult to predict what would happen. Why does Putin not want us in there? I'm sure there are Russia made weapons that Syria is using which in my opinion, the U.S. should not get involved in since it's their weapons aren't harming us. I would really love to stay out of this but and as do 94% of Americans. Only 6% i read 6% approve of going into Syria just because they are using CHEMICAL WEAPONS on their citizens. Who cares.. doesn't involve us. Politicians always want to please others and not their own people in this country which is sad. So an event like this DEFINITELY can start another big war.. I just hope Mr.Obama says no to it all.

[ConfusedDolphin]

None of these countries would even think about jumping into the ship with Syria. It would be idiotic of Japan or China to help Syria.

 

Nevermind Korea isn't even capable of doing that

 

 

I think the course of action right now is best, staying waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay the fk over here instead of getting involved.

 

Maybe not jump in directly, but do we really want a proxy war in the Middle East....?

[RuecanOnRails]

Murica needs to wiggle their junk in everyone's face BECAUSE DEMOCRACY, we all know the US only intervenes to bring democracy to that country. Also oil, oil usually helps the democratic process 

 

You made me think of this lol

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLcHJN1soY4

 

 

 

With tensions currently high around the world, it would be best for America to sit this one out and go over the evidence behind supporting whichever group more closely. Plus they are still sort of at war, maybe finish that up before attacking another nation.

The recent allegations of false information for military actions and various intelligence leaks. It would look very bad if after an attack, news was leaked of an alternate agenda for intervening.

 

America and it's ability to turn anyone into an enemy of the world by throwing key words into speeches such as terrorist, WMD, child porn, and human trafficking is sickening. By doing that they create a mob of support that allows them to follow through with their actions regardless of consequence. When things go wrong and they often do, it's covered up with collateral damage stories and claims of incorrect intelligence.

[eshbop]

The situation in Syria is a very difficult one to deal with at the moment but any leader who uses Chemical weapons against his own people (or at all) have a big fucking price to pay.

Have they even confirmed the government did it? There's evidence that the rebels have access to these kinds of weapons as well and may have used them previously.

 

To me it just doesn't make a whole lot of sense for Obama to threaten action against the government if chemical weapons were used, the UN inspectors then arrive and soon after there is a chemical attack. I'm not saying that Assad is entirely sane, but that's like signing your own death wish.

[BCMods]

Everyone needs to stay out of that mess, especially as we dont even have the facts of the situation entirely lined up yet. Military actions will escalate into a much worse situation. 

 

Shhh, you're just a little confused. Right in what you're saying, but confused nonetheless.

[Daanish375]

http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1l6qzo/eli5_the_united_states_involvement_with_syria_and/cbwb1ld

 

Relevant^

[ConfusedDolphin]

Shhh, you're just a little confused. Right in what you're saying, but confused nonetheless.

damn straight