(April 8, 2016 at 4:43 pm)Mudhammam Wrote: For someone who disclaims any interest in the ethical arguments for or against war, you sure seem intent on making them.. but please try a little harder. I don't even know what your argument is here... pacifism?
First and foremost my argument is the stupidity to believe that you can bomb any given opponent into submission. It only strenghtens the resolve of the ones being bombed, if there are civilian casualties. The one and only occasion where bombs may have had some influence is Japan. But Japan already was on the ground and ready to negotiate if some terms would have been accepted. Foremost not touching the emperor, which they got in any case.
Secondly, I freely admit that I would do my utmost to make the attacker pay, if one of my family fell victim to a drone strike. And that's not only me, that's also what some studies say on the effectiveness of these strikes. They create new enemies, which is only human. There's also precedent from WWII when allied crews have been lynched by the population, if they were unlucky enough to fall into their hands before getting to a POW camp.
Third, which is the unpopular option, if you want to defeat any given enemy, you have to have boots on the ground, and you have to know who you're dealing with. Most of all, have a plan for the aftermath, since large parts of the region's population won't greet you with open arms, but treat you as an occupying force. As has been shown most recently in Iraq and Afghanistan with the blue eyed beacon of democracy approach.
The cynical but only logical approach in regions like Syria, would have been to support Assad. If you don't know who's going to replace him - best recent example Lybia - you have to deal with the devil you know. And that's the only way to end the widespread bloodbath, since there are dozens of opposing groups fighting for unknown goals and being at each others throats.
Same goes for every region the West mingled within the last one and a half decades. Actively working towards removing the secular powers of Iraq and Lybia took the lid off the boiling kettle. Which brings me back to point three. If you go in, you better know all about inner conflicts, ethnicities and believes, and what you, as the invading power, plan to do after the fighting is over.