Two Cheers For The Commons

[poliphilo]

I was thinking of writing a piece yesterday about how public opposition never seems to deter our leaders from going to war but I'm glad I didn't because it seems Cameron is now pulling back from his projected Syrian adventure. I guess he'd done the maths and realized he was likely to lose the vote in the Commons.

Our democracy is in a pretty rickety state but it still sometimes comes good. 

Comments

[veronica-milvus.livejournal.com]

It's so difficult. Seeing hundreds of innocent people die, I feel like we should be doing something. But if that something is more bombing it's not going to solve anything. If Assad gets kicked out it's likely that radical Islam will get in. That won't help the people of Syria much either.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

We're so cross at the Syrians for killing other Syrians that we're going to wade in and kill some Syrians too. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

[lblanchard.livejournal.com]

Meanwhile, over here, the Great Hope of the Western World has drawn a "red line" and now must enforce it or lose face. I am hoping that our Congress will open a giant can of Whoop Ass.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I hope so too.

[cmcmck.livejournal.com]

They need to learn the lessons of Serbia. Didn't work there, won't work here. :o(

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Name me a war that has gone well....

[cmcmck.livejournal.com]

I study 'em as you know and I can't think of any offhand............

[wyrmwwd.livejournal.com]

Why does this sound like Iraq all over again?

"We HAD TO take down Saddam. He used chemical weapons on his own people!"

This seems to be the new strategy to get people in the U.S. to back a war. When I was a kid, all you had to do was say "Communist" and that got them going.

Let me point out that, at least according to what I have read so far, no one knows exactly who is responsible. If I'm not mistaken, that was the case in Iraq as well.

So, it seems there is a pattern developing. A bunch of people are killed by chemical warfare, no one knows who is responsible, but our government eventually ASSUMES that it is the government in question... likely a government with control over some oil resource.... and then we bomb the crap out of them and spend outrageous amounts of money repairing the damage.

Ok. Got it.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

It's a civil war. That means everything is muddled and messy.

I don't think Assad was responsible for the chemical attacks. Why would he do the very thing he's been told would bring the wrath of the Western governments down on his head? Surely he's not such a fool!

[cmcmck.livejournal.com]

Although it seems that the attacks were delivered by missile and the opposition doesn't have much in that way.

[wyrmwwd.livejournal.com]

And, Saddam Hussein never REALLY had WMDs, which was clear the moment the U.S. dropped the first bombs on him. If he really had them, he would have used them.

I trust/believe nothing that I am told anymore.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

They've forfeited our trust.

[wyrmwwd.livejournal.com]

It is sad, because my Dad believed so completely... but by the time I was in high school and faced with Viet Nam, I already had lost my trust. He and I would have these terrible fights about it. Now I realized that he HAD TO believe, or he would never have been able to face the horrorx that he carried inside from WWII.

Now, I have PTSD from just my fears AROUND Viet Nam.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I've always been grateful that our government kept us out of Vietnam- unlike succeeding governments which have been only too happy to follow Washington's lead no matter how wicked or stupid.