Current Events > Let's see how liberals responded to Trump's strike on Syria

(+) Yeah! (+)

Chuck Schumer: this is fine, as long as it doesn't go beyond this
https://twitter.com/SenSchumer/status/984984790431563783
Nancy Pelosi: Trump needs authorization before doing the war I support, also Russia
https://twitter.com/NancyPelosi/status/984973059055636481
Cory Booker: I'm concerned because we haven't debated and authorized this
https://twitter.com/SenBooker/status/984978154736496642
Elizabeth Warren: I'm totally fine with "holding Assad accountable," just let Congress say so
https://twitter.com/SenWarren/status/984979695509934081
Tim Kaine: This is illegal. Mind you, I'm pretty fine with it happening in Syria, but what if North Korea is next?
https://twitter.com/NPRnie/status/984971578885668864
Justin Trudeau: This is good and I support it
https://twitter.com/JustinTrudeau/status/984988183799611392

A lot of process complaints, but very little in terms of substantive opposition to strikes. For the record, Bernie Sanders' statement is much the same way
https://twitter.com/iskandrah/status/984992207160659968
---

Didn't a lot of them support strikes when Obama was president?
---

Remember when we were isolationists? WTF was wrong with that?
---

JustMonika posted...

Didn't a lot of them support strikes when Obama was president?

Probably! My guess is they were more open in their support then, rather than couching it in procedural concerns
---

"But the liberals!"
---

ITT: Black-and-white people discover the word of hues and tones.
---

The Great Muta 22 posted...

"But the liberals!"

I'm not looking to defend Trump's actions. I just wish the #Resistance was as steadfast and firm in opposing war as they are when it comes to the firing of Rod Rosenstein.
---

Sphyx posted...

ITT: Black-and-white people discover the word of hues and tones.

---

antfair posted...

I'm not looking to defend Trump's actions. I just wish the #Resistance was as steadfast and firm in opposing war

Idk, I agree that the less war the better. But like, what do you propose?

What alternative do you think would have been better with dealing with the Syria situation?

It's easy to oppose these types of decisions if you aren't responsible for them or coming up with alternative actions.
---

COVxy posted...

antfair posted...

I'm not looking to defend Trump's actions. I just wish the #Resistance was as steadfast and firm in opposing war

Idk, I agree that the less war the better. But like, what do you propose?

What alternative do you think would have been better with dealing with the Syria situation?

It's easy to oppose these types of decisions if you aren't responsible for them or coming up with alternative actions.

I am a firm believer that not ordering a missile strike would have been a better decision
---

averagejoel posted...

I am a firm believer that not ordering a missile strike would have been a better decision

You realize you didn't actually state anything here, right?
---

COVxy posted...

antfair posted...

I'm not looking to defend Trump's actions. I just wish the #Resistance was as steadfast and firm in opposing war

Idk, I agree that the less war the better. But like, what do you propose?

What alternative do you think would have been better with dealing with the Syria situation?

It's easy to oppose these types of decisions if you aren't responsible for them or coming up with alternative actions.

I would propose not missile striking Damascus.
---

COVxy posted...

You realize you didn't actually state anything here, right?

---

I don't get why you feel "we shouldn't launch missiles to strike Damascus" is not stating anything.
---

antfair posted...

I don't get why you feel "we shouldn't launch missiles to strike Damascus" is not stating anything.

Because 'don't do that' is not an alternative plan. Shit's still a mess in Syria, and all you've done is stick to your no nuance 'war bad' viewpoint, which is an easy one to hold since it is so popular.
---

COVxy posted...

Because 'don't do that' is not an alternative plan.

It is, given that "doing that" is largely what has caused the problem. There are some issues that the U.S. cannot solve with its military. I'm not particularly religious, but I'm reminded of the Serenity Prayer:

God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
and the Wisdom to know the difference.

This is something we cannot change, at least not for the better, through military action.

COVxy posted...

an easy one to hold since it is so popular.

Every major media outlet, the President of the United States, the majority of his party, and a great deal of the opposition holds your viewpoint on this matter.
---

It seems like most of them support it, but they are hiding behind "It has to be authorized first!"
---

antfair posted...

There are some issues that the U.S. cannot solve with its military

So propose an alternative action.
---

COVxy posted...

antfair posted...

There are some issues that the U.S. cannot solve with its military

So propose an alternative action.

Start taking in more refugees rather than creating them.
---

I'm glad a lot of both sides of the aisle take opposition to this in some way or another (aside from the Neocons and Neoliberals) but they really did look the other way when Clinton and Obama did it.
---

antfair posted...

Start taking in more refugees rather than creating them.

But like, it's an entire country. Surely you don't think we can airlift the entire population of Syria to the US.
---

TheMikh posted...

I'm glad both sides of the aisle take opposition to this in some way or another (aside from the Neocons and Neoliberals) but they really did look the other way when Clinton and Obama did it.

This is not opposition, though I understand your confusion.
---

COVxy posted...

But like, it's an entire country. Surely you don't think we can airlift the entire population of Syria to the US.

We can take more than 11
https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2018/04/12/602022877/the-u-s-has-welcomed-only-11-syrian-refugees-this-year
---

Sure, but it doesn't solve the problem.
---

COVxy posted...

Because 'don't do that' is not an alternative plan. Shit's still a mess in Syria, and all you've done is stick to your no nuance 'war bad' viewpoint, which is an easy one to hold since it is so popular.

I have never once in my life heard of a mess that got cleaned up by launching missiles at it.
---

shockthemonkey posted...

What problem are we trying to solve?

Deterring or stopping war crimes by a corrupt government, from the sound of it.
---

COVxy posted...

Sure, but it doesn't solve the problem.

Can you solve the problem without worsening the situation? if you switch this train to a different track, are there more people lying, tied down to that track?
---

antfair posted...

COVxy posted...

Sure, but it doesn't solve the problem.

Can you solve the problem without worsening the situation? if you switch this train to a different track, are there more people lying, tied down to that track?

Hmm, military strikes on military targets vs directed attacks on civilians.

Seems to me that if every time you do something, you get your infrastructure destroyed with no option of response, you might reduce the frequency in which you do that something. It's not like the logic is hard to understand or irrational. You simply don't like the resultant conclusion.
---

COVxy posted...

Hmm, military strikes on military targets vs directed attacks on civilians.

Didn't we do military strikes on military targets last year?

COVxy posted...

Seems to me that if every time you do something, you get your infrastructure destroyed with no option of response, you might reduce the frequency in which you do that something.

Every time the US military does something in the middle east it seems to result in chaos. Perhaps we should reduce that frequency.
---

shockthemonkey posted...

What problem are we trying to solve?

How to justify spending all that money on bombs.
---

antfair posted...

Didn't we do military strikes on military targets last year?

And you don't think that reduced the likelihood? And you don't think a second strike reduced it even further?

Early in learning, a rat will repeat the same mistake frequently when learning the response contingencies.

antfair posted...

Every time the US military does something in the middle east it seems to result in chaos. Perhaps we should reduce that frequency.

I don't disagree with that sentiment. The middle east is a hard subject though, with a lot of factors to consider. There is no easy solution, so let's stop pretending like doing nothing is the cure-all.
---

turns out neoliberals and neoconservatives aren't so different
---

COVxy posted...

What alternative do you think would have been better with dealing with the Syria situation?

Grabbing lunch and focusing on something that matters in America. We don't need to deal with that situation. We don't need to fix it.
---

hockeybub89 posted...

COVxy posted...

What alternative do you think would have been better with dealing with the Syria situation?

Grabbing lunch and focusing on something that matters in America.

Yes, pretending like this issue doesn't exist seems to be the resounding answer.
---

COVxy posted...

The middle east is a hard subject though, with a lot of factors to consider.

Why is it our subject? What benefit has the US gained from our involvement?

COVxy posted...

There is no easy solution, so let's stop pretending like doing nothing is the cure-all.

We have tried bombing. We have invading and occupying. We have tried arming moderate rebels (in more than one country!) We have tried drone strikes. We have tried decapitation strikes to remove a leader from power.

Perhaps we should try not blowing people up, for a change. First, do no harm.
---

antfair posted...

Every time the US military does something in the middle east it seems to result in chaos. Perhaps we should reduce that frequency.

it's almost like that is the point.
---

COVxy posted...

hockeybub89 posted...

COVxy posted...

What alternative do you think would have been better with dealing with the Syria situation?

Grabbing lunch and focusing on something that matters in America.

Yes, pretending like this issue doesn't exist seems to be the resounding answer.

how is more death going to help?
---

COVxy posted...

Early in learning, a rat will repeat the same mistake frequently when learning the response contingencies.

As evidenced by our continued insistence on using military force in the middle east despite repeated disaster.
---

antfair posted...

Perhaps we should try not blowing people up, for a change. First, do no harm.

Indeed, let chaos ensue elsewhere, it's better if other people's heads are being cut off by OTHER people. If people are being blown up by OTHER people. As long as it's not us.

I mean, like, there's only so much you can do with threats of economic restrictions. Unless you got the entire world to band together and cut off resources from a country (which is an action that would lead to a lot of death anyway...), it's really hard to imagine a nonviolent solution.

Yes, we've been at war, that doesn't mean that war isn't an answer sometimes.
---

shockthemonkey posted...

...you think there is less chaos with the US bombing Syria than there would be otherwise?

I think these military strikes certainly lower the probability of the Assad regime repeating the same actions that led to the strikes, yes.
---

COVxy posted...

Indeed, let chaos ensue elsewhere, it's better if other people's heads are being cut off by OTHER people. If people are being blown up by OTHER people. As long as it's not us.

I don't vote in Syrian elections; I can only sway and influence the actions of my country. Death will probably occur out there in the world, but I'd just as soon see my tax dollars not go towards blowing things up half a world away.
---

COVxy posted...

antfair posted...

I'm not looking to defend Trump's actions. I just wish the #Resistance was as steadfast and firm in opposing war

Idk, I agree that the less war the better. But like, what do you propose?

What alternative do you think would have been better with dealing with the Syria situation?

It's easy to oppose these types of decisions if you aren't responsible for them or coming up with alternative actions.

Literally doing nothing in Syria.
---

COVxy is going to die of old age before he receives an alternate plan from someone here lol
---

antfair posted...

COVxy posted...

Indeed, let chaos ensue elsewhere, it's better if other people's heads are being cut off by OTHER people. If people are being blown up by OTHER people. As long as it's not us.

I don't vote in Syrian elections; I can only sway and influence the actions of my country. Death will probably occur out there in the world, but I'd just as soon see my tax dollars not go towards blowing things up half a world away.

But isn't that intrinsically selfish? More or less, you only oppose death when your hands get dirty with it? And even when it's for the purposes of trying to help the situation.
---

darkjedilink posted...

COVxy posted...

antfair posted...

I'm not looking to defend Trump's actions. I just wish the #Resistance was as steadfast and firm in opposing war

Idk, I agree that the less war the better. But like, what do you propose?

What alternative do you think would have been better with dealing with the Syria situation?

It's easy to oppose these types of decisions if you aren't responsible for them or coming up with alternative actions.

Literally doing nothing in Syria.

and Iraq

and Iran

and etc
---

COVxy posted...

antfair posted...

COVxy posted...

Indeed, let chaos ensue elsewhere, it's better if other people's heads are being cut off by OTHER people. If people are being blown up by OTHER people. As long as it's not us.

I don't vote in Syrian elections; I can only sway and influence the actions of my country. Death will probably occur out there in the world, but I'd just as soon see my tax dollars not go towards blowing things up half a world away.

But isn't that intrinsically selfish? More or less, you only oppose death when your hands get dirty with it? And even when it's for the purposes of trying to help the situation.

we aren't trying to fucking help the situation
---