Isn't not time yet for the USA to go into Syria and fix the problems against humanity by now?

Nope- a report from a definite raconteur isn't a suitable statement, and is even much less skill than a Gerneral assembly ruling. so as many biased comments using fact the UN lapdogs produce, they are going to all finally end up being meaningless using fact the only place something significant happens is interior the seucrity council the place the Arab bloc isn't able to impact the vote casting througgh weight of numbers. The UN regularly occurring assembly has ebcome a humorous tale with the only difficulty counting being who you desire to be acquaintances with and snug as much as.

>Isn't not time yet ....<

Oh good grief...

When going into Libya, Obama set a certain threshold at which he would consider using military force. Ok, you can chose to agree or disagree with that, but the maddening thing now in Syria is that the Syrians have crossed that line, and Obama is doing nothing and saying little.

So once again, just what is the threshold?

It certainly seems to be some very arbitrary decision making on the part of the Obama administration and this in itself is not good.

Not our fight, the Syrians are being backed by the Russians, Iranians, and Chinese publicly, not some puppet government satellite like the Cold War. If the US decides to take a militiristic approach to this issue, the entire region would be up in arms, and concidering recent events Israel being a agressor and waving the war flag constantly the US would not only be fighting in Syria, Iran would get involved, pretty much the entire region of the middle east would condem the action and impose santions on imports, oil. The US would stand alone in attacking the middle east again, Israel being in the middle of all this.

Name the last time the U.S. military unilaterally went into a country in the Middle East and "fixed" it.

Oh, you can't.

Syria is a fked up situation, no doubt (MUCH worse than Libya). But unilateral military action is STUPID, STUPID, STUPID.

In addition, arming the rebels is STUPID, STUPID, STUPID (we tried this in the 70s when we armed Osama Bin Laden's people to fight the Soviets.........lesson learned).

The problem here is that Obama SHOULD NOT have intervened in Libya. Then he wouldn't be dancing around pretending like what's happening in Syria is not as bad if not worse. This is a DOMESTIC Syrian problem.

I didn't even bother to read the article you got this idea from...

Because no matter what that article said, we can't afford another war. Along with the real possibility that Russia and Iran would jump into the fight being Syria's allies and with Iran now fighting China and North Korea would most likely join.

That is a stupid idea.

Are we the only other country in the world?

What about all their neighbors? What about Turkey?

We're too broke and overextended. We need to focus on our own problems.

Not to mention, Syria is being backed by China and Russia. You really think we can on all that?

No. Sunni deserve what they get. They championed their man-god Saddam while Shia were being fed into meat grinders. Sunni around the world are monsters and malcontents.

No ... we had our own 'bloody' revolution back in 1770 to get rid of an unwanted colonial power, our own 'bloody' civil war back in 1861 to sort out our own country's political problems ... the Syrians must do the same ... it's their country so it's up to them to fix it ... !

No, it is time for the US to mind it's own business and get the hell out of the Middle east.

Being the policeman of the world is wrong. And the Syrian rebels are not better than their government.