When it comes to Syria and chemical weapons, the question everyone seems to be asking is “did they cross the red line?” Not one person has been capable of answering the question with any true confidence. No matter who is questioned on the matter, an elegant tap-dance unfolds ensuring not to say anything that goes against one party-line or another.
Maybe “did they cross the red line” isn’t the appropriate question needing to be asked at the current moment.
Part of the critical thinking process is collecting all known facts on a subject then asking “critical questions.” This is essential for intelligence analysis.
“Did they cross the red line” is not critical enough.
or Log In
Regarding the video of civilians that were exposed to chem agents, I saw no physical symptoms that are classically associated with any chem agents. The claim is that Sarin was used. This is not supported by the video evidence in my opinion. As an NBC NCO in the army, we were shown the effects of all chem agents on goats and are very familiar with the symptoms to include early onset symptoms. I saw no indication. All parties involved have a motivation to deploy these weapons either preemptively or as in the case of the Assad government, as a last ditch campaign.
Virginstateofmind We should police when it is in our interests after careful analysis. This analysis should be done at the first indication as we should not be caught reacting and forced into a premature action. We should be war gaming all possible scenarios that consider the future foreign developments. From the evidence of past reactions, it is apparent we are approaching this in an amateurish reactive way.
Couldn't have said it any better, except to wonder how the Obama Administration can call a bomb designed to kill and injure hundreds in a close proximity to a weapon designed to kill millions within an immediate radius of 50 miles and then the immediate effect it will have on the surrounding areas, I think, by 150 miles.
"A “red line” may eventually be crossed in Syria but currently, no one knows the full http://amzn.to/RXk7dS of the situation...." Damned straight...and there's a report I read in one news outlet that says that the White House is "reconsidering" supplying arms to anti-Assad forces on the weight of this red-line business...we're not likely to get this Gordian Knot sorted out for us by State or the media (which has been proven to be amenable to printing the propaganda of the side which furthers their agenda's narratives) or by any pundit you'd care to mention. Right now, it's bad guys killin' bad guys...it's a mine-field with old and new geopolitical client and sponsor interests, religious kerfuffles (Shia Alawites supported by Shia black-hats and Sunni opposition supported by Sunni fanatics of one stripe or another)...and we've got a Foreign Service that doesn't seem to realize that giving Egypt to the Muslim Brotherhood on a silver salver is a bad idea. Red line? Regional instability be damned...it's the fucking Middle East! It's unstable by definition...hopefully they'll kill the nimble and the resourceful ones, distracting themselves long enough for some of the dodo's in Foggy Bottom to figure out which son of a bitch over there is, in FDR's words, is "our son of a bitch".... Put the red pen away....
Minou_Demimonde sahaldelta Probably because it's easier to put the blame on Uncle Sam when something "bad" happens. 'Look the Americans are bombing innocent civilians. They're committing war crimes. Someone stop these warmongers". Fucking tools. All of them/