Iran In Syria

[Stoked]

I could see this starting WW3. I think we all see it starting in the middle east. With all the major players backing smaller countries. Does China have a stake in all this?
I still would like to see us sit on the sideline unless the people are Syria are begging for our help. If they want us we'll be there, but are we really in danger if
we just sit on the sidelines?

I'd prefer we stay out of it as well. That raises another concern though. Why were the people in Kosovo and Libya more deserving of our help than the Syrians or the victimis in Africa? Consistancy please.

But I see any escalation being the result of being treaty bound to engage and not just choosing to.

As for China having a stake in this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People's_Republic_of_China–Iran_relations

 

[Deleted member 848]

I'd prefer we stay out of it as well. That raises another concern though. Why were the people in Kosovo and Libya more deserving of our help than the Syrians or the victimis in Africa?

My parents are both from Kosovo, and I have often wondered this as well. I'm the farthest thing from a conspiracy-theorist, but it seems as if sometimes developed nations are very.....choosy in terms of who they make a strong push to help out.


Intervening in Kosovo was largely a PR-resuscitation from Clinton to help people forget how much everybody blew it with Rwanda, and Libya seems like the sort of country that the West would LOVE to have close relations with. Same with Kosovo

 

[Stoked]

My parents are both from Kosovo, and I have often wondered this as well. I'm the farthest thing from a conspiracy-theorist, but it seems as if sometimes developed nations are very.....choosy in terms of who they make a strong push to help out.


Intervening in Kosovo was largely a PR-resuscitation from Clinton to help people forget how much everybody blew it with Rwanda, and Libya seems like the sort of country that the West would LOVE to have close relations with. Same with Kosovo

They are absolutely picking and choosing. That is a fantastic way to show you do not hold to your ideals. Either you do and get involved in them all or you do not get involved. be consistant.

 

[Revolution 9]

I'd prefer we stay out of it as well. That raises another concern though. Why were the people in Kosovo and Libya more deserving of our help than the Syrians or the victimis in Africa? Consistancy please.

I agree. I'd be more in favor of staying out of all of them unless they people call for our help. Spending money to kick out one bad leader when usually another crops up in his place.

It shouldn't be a given that we come to your country. If you're in the streets waving our flags, then we should strongly consider it. I want to be wanted damn it.

 

[Stoked]

I agree. I'd be more in favor of staying out of all of them unless they people call for our help. Spending money to kick out one bad leader when usually another crops up in his place.

It shouldn't be a given that we come to your country. If you're in the streets waving our flags, then we should strongly consider it. I want to be wanted damn it.

I agree.

 

[addictionary]

There's no help in politics, there's only involvement. None of the states in the world would do anything for any other if it didn't feed their interests. If a state is not build up by nationalism and ideologies alike or it is not institutionalized well enough, individual power holders abuse their authorities and do things against their own states will. That is the only difference. If a strong state does not interfere with Darfur or Somalia, it is in their best interest. If they do aid some country, the aided countries oppositions are usually the aid's enemy or rival in one or more economic/firepowerwise/idealisticwise etc. platforms.