Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
I haven't seen anyone teach such a thing.
No surprise: you only missed half the things that have happened in the Middle East since nearly 70 years...

Syria is not "a nation of crazy terrorists"...
Next time I'm there and happen to run over any kind of US tourists (is unlikely to happen any time soon, of course, but you ought to be patient when things are about Syria), I'll ask them for their telephone numbers or e-mail addresses. Then I'll forward these to you so you can ask them - and hear with your own ears - what they've been told by their family, friends etc. when informing them they're about to do a trip to Syria.

...but a Syrian civil war with active Western intervention would be an irresistible and accessible magnet for crazy terrorists from anywhere else. It would also provide a convenient and attractive target for the crazy terrorists...
Ah, I see: you're back to tell me a few jokes again.

Tell me: Syria didn't become 'an irresistible and accessible magnet for crazy terrorists'? And this didn't happen precisely because of....what idiotic reason is now going to come to your mind...?

Certainly the Syrian Civil War will attract its share of crazies even without Western involvement...
Ah, you - the very person that is so much in love with complaining about anybody trying to 'guess the future' - is now predicting the future, and say 'it will'?

Because you don't think it didn't do so - already?

...and certainly those crazies and their future activities are a problem, but any argument that intervention would have prevented, rather than exacerbated, that problem would be extraordinarily speculative.
While your argumentation is based on legs as solid as a card tower, eh?

I can't see any basis at all for a claim that the Syrian Civil War is a consequence of American or Western actions and therefore an American or Western "responsibility".
Oh, anybody trying to say 'this is what caused the war' is simply stupid. That's sure. But, sigh... well somebody like you, somebody who is trying to discuss the developments in Syria, and especially somebody doing that and being from the USA, sigh.... gosh, this is so boring to explain for XYth time, especially to people so insistent on proving completely unable to think and learn... might want to recall all the BS caused by Bush Sr.'s calls for Iraqis to raise against Saddam, back in March-April 1991, and then what has his failure to support the Iraqis that rose caused over the time.

(And no, I'm not worried: you're now certainly going to come back with some sort of hyper-eloquent explanation for why there is no need for you - or anybody else in all of the USA - to learn anything from that, and so many other, similar examples.)

Who exactly is the US "supposed to be protecting" in Syria?
Ah, yes: there are no 'civilians' in Syria. 'Terrorists parking only' there...

Well, no problem. Let the Iranians, Hezbollah and a regime that has a history of supporting about 40 different terrorist organizations around the world finish their business. They might take quite some time, few years at least, but if you let them: then there will be - indeed - nobody left to protect.