Yeah, I am going to side with the military/diplomatic/intelligence experts around the world that unanimously agree that ground troops in Syria would be a bad thing, and that you can't get much worse than Assad.
No one is saying that America should forcibly remove Assad, but if you want to solve this refugee crisis and bring stability to that region, it's pretty clear Assad's gotta go. That means supporting Iraqi, Kurdish, and Iranian troops on the ground, and seriously pressuring the Saudis to do something.
The argument that creating a vacuum will always bring ISIS is just dumb. Power vacuums happen all of the time, and when the vacation is Assad or the like, sometimes you have to take your chances.
Besides, no matter what happens in Syria, WWIII is not a plausible result.
No one is saying that America should forcibly remove Assad, but if you want to solve this refugee crisis and bring stability to that region, it's pretty clear Assad's gotta go. That means supporting Iraqi, Kurdish, and Iranian troops on the ground, and seriously pressuring the Saudis to do something.
The argument that creating a vacuum will always bring ISIS is just dumb. Power vacuums happen all of the time, and when the vacation is Assad or the like, sometimes you have to take your chances.
Besides, no matter what happens in Syria, WWIII is not a plausible result.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
