US attacks syria

[Libsmasher]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,444101,00.html

This is way overdue. The US should get a change in international law which says:

"Any country which harbors irregular forces which attack another country or another country's armed forces, is responsible for stopping such attacks, and failing that, the attacked country shall have the right to attack such forces within the harboring country."

If there is no international agreement to this, the US should announce that it is a policy that it will follow.

The US should also warn all civilians that they should stay away from persons warring on the US, whatever country they inhabit, lest they endanger themselves.

 

[Agnapostate]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,444101,00.html

This is way overdue. The US should get a change in international law which says:

"Any country which harbors irregular forces which attack another country or another country's armed forces, is responsible for stopping such attacks, and failing that, the attacked country shall have the right to attack such forces within the harboring country."

Should we aim at Israel then?

 

[Pandora]

Should we aim at Israel then?

no of course not

 

[Pandora]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,444101,00.html

This is way overdue. The US should get a change in international law which says:

"Any country which harbors irregular forces which attack another country or another country's armed forces, is responsible for stopping such attacks, and failing that, the attacked country shall have the right to attack such forces within the harboring country."

If there is no international agreement to this, the US should announce that it is a policy that it will follow.

The US should also warn all civilians that they should stay away from persons warring on the US, whatever country they inhabit, lest they endanger themselves.

I dont know enough about this,

did anyone die. why did they attack exactly? what did Syria do that made US think we should attack?

 

[GenSeneca]

I dont know enough about this,

did anyone die. why did they attack exactly? what did Syria do that made US think we should attack?

We targeted and killed a top supplier of the Iraqi insurgency. I saw the remains of the car the dude was traveling in... he got smoked.

 

[GenSeneca]

Should we aim at Israel then?

Why would we do that?

 

[Pandora]

We targeted and killed a top supplier of the Iraqi insurgency. I saw the remains of the car the dude was traveling in... he got smoked.

well that sounds simple enough, if that is what happened then good
but I hope he died quickly and was not in pain

 

[Mr. Carpenter]

Should we aim at Israel then?

Only if we can target the Dome of the Rock, and Kaaba first! Then when we do target Israel, we'll make sure it's on the "palestinian" settlements, so that we can help our ALLY get rid of their "pest problem".

 

[Agnapostate]

Why would we do that?

Only if we can target the Dome of the Rock, and Kaaba first! Then when we do target Israel, we'll make sure it's on the "palestinian" settlements, so that we can help our ALLY get rid of their "pest problem".

Oh. I was under the impression that we were targeting terrorists. My mistake.

 

[BigRob]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,444101,00.html

This is way overdue. The US should get a change in international law which says:

"Any country which harbors irregular forces which attack another country or another country's armed forces, is responsible for stopping such attacks, and failing that, the attacked country shall have the right to attack such forces within the harboring country."

We cannot really "change" international law to say this. We can simply say it and do it, but it really won't mean all that much in terms of international law. I doubt we can put together a treaty that says this either. It also has to much potential to backfire and invite a Russian invasion of Chechnya, or a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.

If there is no international agreement to this, the US should announce that it is a policy that it will follow.

I think the implications around the world are to great to openly state this. If you want to follow this policy, do it covertly.

The US should also warn all civilians that they should stay away from persons warring on the US, whatever country they inhabit, lest they endanger themselves.

Easier said than done in most of these situations.

I also have to ask myself if we have fully thought these actions through. From an operational standpoint, there is no doubt we need to be doing this. Not only here, but in Pakistan as well. We cannot win without it.

From a political standpoint, this is a terrible policy to follow.

 

[Pandora]

Oh. I was under the impression that we were targeting terrorists. My mistake.

you think that the people in Israel are terrorists?

 

[Agnapostate]

you think that the people in Israel are terrorists?

The state of Israel harbors and sponsors terrorism, yes.

 

[Pandora]

The state of Israel harbors and sponsors terrorism, yes.

if someone kills your kids and you bomb thier house are you a terrorist?

 

[GenSeneca]

The state of Israel harbors and sponsors terrorism, yes.

Here is a link to the Dept of State.

Please identify the terrorist groups located and operating from Israel.

 

[BigRob]

if someone kills your kids and you bomb thier house are you a terrorist?

This is the problem with a declaration such as this from the United States, "terrorist" will be a relative term and mean many things to many people.

To make a functional policy, such as you are advocating, it must be worded differently, or established in a different light.