|
DesideriScuri -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/28/2013 5:58:19 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
Once culpability is established a firm response is mandatory. It is totally unacceptable for any one to use such ghastly weapons in today's world. The use of chemical weapons in a largely civilian area is a crime against humanity. Regardless of how long it may take, those responsible must be called to account for their actions before the International Court, and if found guilty dealt with severely. In the interim, a military response against the guilty party may be the only option available.
Until culpability is established, caution is the best policy IMHO. Any reaction must await the findings of the UN investigation team, and any response must be put to the UN Security Council before it is launched. Action approved by the UN is far less likely to inflame intemperate reactions. It's difficult to see vetoes being used if the UN can find proof that either Assad or the Opposition carried out the attack. It is important to observe the letter and the spirit of international law if this horror is to be dealt with in a satisfactory manner.
This.
Now, let's set the assumption (for the sake of argument), that it wasn't Assad or his forces that used the chemical weapons. Let's set the assumption that it was one of the rebels that did this in an effort to bring the US and other outside nations into the conflict. The rebels include a variety of groups, any of which could have used the chem. weapons without the knowledge of the rest. What, then? Taking down the rebels wouldn't be meting out justice properly. That would be punishing all the rebel groups for the, potentially, actions of just one group.
Whatever action is taken by external countries, it has to be seen for the whole of what it is. If we are going to take down Assad, we have to understand that this is, in effect, supporting the rebel groups. If we are going to take down the rebels, this is, in effect, supporting Assad.
This is a fucked up situation.
|
|
|
|
