The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionWe need to do something about Syria
by Mario T. García on Feb. 06, 2012
Every week, every day, we get new reports of deaths, killings, shootings, military repression, attacks on innocent civilians and other horrors in Syria. It is estimated that more than 5,000 people were killed in the last few months, and there's no end in sight of the repression of the Syrian government.
I just watched a CNN broadcast that featured a young Syrian opponent of the regime broadcasting through Skype that in one Syrian city, about 200 people were killed by army artillery and tank fire on Friday alone. With much emotion, the young Syrian told Anderson Cooper, "People are dying and the U.N. and others are doing nothing!"
He's right. Yes, there are some sanctions, but they do not seem to be effective. The U.N. Security Council is discussing a resolution asking for President Bashar al-Assad to step down. But no resolution, even assuming if it passed, is going to result in such resignation.
I am not per se a proponent of the use of force or armed intervention, but something more drastic needs to be done, and done soon. I don't believe that the U.N. will act, since both Russia and China are opposed to any drastic action and would veto it. Therefore, it seems to me that perhaps NATO in conjunction with the Arab League can move more forcibly to put some greater pressure on the Syrian government to end its violent repression of its own people.
Why not blockade Syrian trade routes? And if this does not work, as in Libya, air attacks on Syrian military posts may have to be conducted. If the United States and other NATO allies along with the Arab League supported military action against Libya, then it seems to me the same could be done with an even more bloodthirsty Syrian regime. Sometimes more drastic action has to be taken to save lives. Syrians are being killed every day, and we cannot in good conscience just do nothing or very little.
"Sometimes more drastic
"Sometimes more drastic action has to be taken to save lives." Really? This is the logic that was used to justify the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. I didn't know you were in favor of military intervention.
I am wary of unilateral
I am wary of unilateral American military action, even for so called "humanitarian purposes." The Russians and Chinese appear to be blocking any meaningful action by the United Nations. Other than humanitarian aid, I am not sure there is much we, the US can actually do.
There were no Israeli troops
There were no Israeli troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya. Israel borders on Syria. Let them do humanitarian relief..instead of bombing Iran..
At what price peace? … At
At what price peace? … At what price war?
In Libya’s revolution, between 13,000 and 27,000 men, women and children died; and perhaps five times as many were wounded. Each life lost or person wounded created ripple effects that destroyed other peoples’ emotional and financial worlds. Most suffering will not be quelled in a generation. Additionally, hundreds of millions of dollars were spent in the warfare resulting in enormous destruction of real and personal private property. The revolution was an absolute calamity. Like most major disasters, time will pass and some sort of normality will return, but never for the dead.
To what good end?
If we had demonstrations in the US, what would be the tipping number of deaths required before an all-out revolution started? What would be accomplished? Will the sacrifices made, justify the ultimate outcome?
These same questions must be asked in the Syrian situation?
What would the good people in our bible do?
By the end of the debacle we
By the end of the debacle we will have spent over a trillion dollars on Iraq and Afghanistan. That is a hefty chunk of bread. The return on that investment has been well over a hundred thousand innocent civilians dead and millions displaced/destitute/brutalized. Oh yeah, and Iran, once the hated enemy of the Iraqis is now on much better terms. Great. Good "conservative" use of taxpayer money.
So what should we do with Syria - and Iran for that matter? Well, like Iraq and Afghanistan the people of neither country actually hate us at present. Sure, we could change that in an afternoon of bombing, but at the moment Americans are not a big problem for them. Here's an idea that will save money! (and maybe lives too): pay the ruling elites (we actually have pretty good intel on who is who in both countries) to step down. No, really.
Look, I'm pro-life. By that I mean that I value life above treasure. If I can write a check to avoid bloodshed; I'm there. No, I'm not naive. I realize that both situations are intricate and dangerous. All I'm suggesting is that we stop using cash in the form of bombs as a fist strike weapon and start using cash in the form of cash, (and diplomacy, opportunity, dignity, justice,..and other Christian stuff.)
Post new comment