Is It Hypocritical of Us Not to Help Syria?

[T.hill]

I agree with and understand the underlying practical and moral reasoning to not get involved, but i'm not asking for justification for whether we should or shouldn't help syria.

My question at its core is there reasoning for why it wouldn't be hypocritical for us to not help Syria or any country for that matter actively trying to gain independence or freedom when we were given help ourselves during our revolution?

[TER]

In our Revolution, it was Americans fighting for freedom from a foreign power.

In Syria, it is paid Islamic mercenaries from outside of Syria painted as 'Syrian rebels' who are fighting to instill an Islamic State.

Not. The. Same. Thing.

[enhanced_deficit]

I agree with and understand the underlying practical and moral reasoning to not get involved, but i'm not asking for justification for whether we should or shouldn't help syria.

My question at its core is there reasoning for why it wouldn't be hypocritical for us to not help Syria or any country for that matter actively trying to gain independence or freedom when we were given help ourselves during our revolution?

We will have to start with "helping" with independence or freedom for Palestinian people though, since we have been actualy funding their occupation and oppression for 4 decades. When Gaza was bombed recently amidst charges of chemicals weapons use/war crimes and thousands of civilians were killed, SWC plant Obama sat on his hands as did Rafael Cruz.

BTW, Hypocrisy is our middle name (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?418882-Epic-Video-Obama-called-quot-war-criminal-quot-amp-quot-hypocrite-of-the-century-quot-in-Irish-Parliament&p=5087845&viewfull=1#post5087845), you didn't know that?

[dannno]

Wait a minute, are you paying attention?

The people who want to use our tax dollars to 'help' Syria aren't interested in 'helping' Syria at all, they have business interests in instating a puppet dictator to help their business interests. That's it.

In fact, there is evidence to suggest that we have been helping the Al Qaeda rebels, and the reason we want to go in and help them even more is because supposedly Assad carried out a chemical weapons attack.. But even that is a lie as we are finding out that the Al Qaeda forces we are backing are most likely the perpetrators of the attack on innocent people, and something tells me that we are the ones ultimately responsible for that chemical weapons attack and it was carried out deliberately as a false flag to blame Assad so we can go in and take him out.

Why the hell anybody would trust those people to help anybody is beyond me.

[heavenlyboy34]

In our Revolution, it was Americans fighting for freedom from a foreign power.

In Syria, it is paid Islamic mercenaries from outside of Syria painted as 'Syrian rebels' who are fighting to instill an Islamic State.

Not. The. Same. Thing.
That^^ And I don't believe it was smart of the French regime to get involved in the US Revolutionary War either. Long story that I don't want to derail the thread with, but I don't believe the Revolutionary War was a "Good/Just War".

[T.hill]

I should probably clarify I'm not asking about the situation in Syria specifically per se, but the idea in general.

[dannno]

I should probably clarify I'm not asking about the situation in Syria specifically per se, but the idea in general.

I don't think the situation would change much no matter where you go, we aren't 'helping' anybody, I don't know where that idea comes from.

[Kodaddy]

Should I help the "bloods", or should I help the "crips"?...decisions, decisions...

[DamianTV]

Define "Help"

Help meaning blowing up someones Enemies for them?

Help meaning spread Tyranny and label it Freedom?

Help meaning actually provide Non Aggressive Assistance to those who are in a current state of suffering, such as needing Medical Attention or Food, or other forms of aid essencial to Life? (Note: this does not include Free Education or Retirement)

Help meaning replace a Power Mad Regime with an even more Power Mad Regime?

Help meaning Financial Aid by replacing One Fiat Money System with Another Fiat Money System (IE Central Bank)?

Our Govt has some very very funny interpretations of the word "Help". Just look at what happens to so many people when they call 911 for "Help" and end up in a Body Bag.

[TER]

If some nut dictator was gassing innocent people and doing crimes against humanity and the American people wanted to do something to help ease the suffering of the innocent, then that is why we have a Congress to go and make the case for action. Unfortunately, that process has become corrupted.

[enhanced_deficit]

I should probably clarify I'm not asking about the situation in Syria specifically per se, but the idea in general.

Ok, but you cited Syria in your argument/question where we are not enabling oppression of the people but did not even mention Palestinian people whose oppression you are funding if you are a tax payer. I was just pointing out that charity begins at home and then we move on to neighborhood.

[heavenlyboy34]

If some nut dictator was gassing innocent people and doing crimes against humanity and the American people wanted to do something to help ease the suffering of the innocent, then that is why we have a Congress to go and make the case for action. Unfortunately, that process has become corrupted.
Why is it Congress' business to get involved in foreign affairs they have no direct interest in? :eek:

[TaftFan]

Democracy =/ liberty

[TER]

Why is it Congress' business to get involved in foreign affairs they have no direct interest in? :eek:

Because Congress represents the people and the will of the people. If it is the will of the people to stop heinous crimes such as genocide, then it is the duty of the Representatives of Congress to make a case for it and then vote on it. At least, that is how I understand it, though I may be wrong.

[DamianTV]

If some nut dictator was gassing innocent people and doing crimes against humanity and the American people wanted to do something to help ease the suffering of the innocent, then that is why we have a Congress to go and make the case for action. Unfortunately, that process has become corrupted.

More people need to pay more attention to the Real News. MSM is NOT going to cover this, they'll continue baning the WWIII War Drums.

The UN is now saying it is VERY POSSIBLE that the REBELS were the ones that launched the Chemical Attack, not the Assad Regime.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/28/320870/israeli-falseflag-in-syria/


That is the question being asked by the “patriotic” segments of the US military and intelligence communities - and other military and intelligence communities worldwide.

The Israelis inadvertently revealed their probable complicity in the false-flag chemical attack in Syria by immediately claiming to know who did it. Ever since the Syrian chemical attack story broke, the Israelis have been screaming that Assad crossed Obama's “red line” and demanding US intervention.

But why would the Syrian government, which has recently made big gains against foreign-backed insurgents, shoot itself in the foot by staging a massive chemical weapons attack at the exact moment UN Weapons Inspectors arrived in Damascus? Are we supposed to believe that Assad is suicidally stupid?

Whatever one may say about Assad, he is neither stupid nor suicidal.

To solve this crime - like all other crimes - we must ask who had the means, motive, and opportunity.

Let us begin with motive. Assad had no motive to launch a big chemical attack - and a very strong motive not to.

So who did have a motive? Or, as the Latin phrase has it, cui bono: “Who gains?”

The answer: Israel and its al-Qaeda allies.

Israel and al-Qaeda share the same geo-strategic goal: The destabilization of the Middle East. Both want to destroy currently-existing Arab states, beginning with Syria.


Israel wants to balkanize the Middle East by smashing large countries like Syria into tiny ethnic and sectarian enclaves. This has been core Israeli strategic doctrine at least since the publication of the Oded Yinon plan in the 1970s. The current destabilization of Syria is primarily an Israeli project - part of the destruction of “seven countries in five years” that Gen. Wesley Clark revealed was the neocon plan after 9/11.

Al-Qaeda, like Israel, wants to destroy currently existing Arab states. It says its ultimate goal is a united Islamic world. But the al-Qaeda brand is so unpopular throughout the Arab and Muslim world that the idea of an al-Qaeda-led caliphate is laughable. All al-Qaeda can accomplish is help destroy Muslim countries in service to the Israelis and their Saudi and American puppets.

So Israel and its assets in Saudi Arabia and the US are working together to destabilize Syria - and Egypt, where Israeli puppet al-Sisi has demolished democracy and established a dictatorship far more autocratic and brutal than anything Mubarak ever dreamed of.

The chemical weapons attack in Damascus was obviously a Zionist ploy to drag the US deeper into the Syrian conflict. The Israelis, the world's grand masters at the game of false-flag terrorism, had the means, motive, and opportunity.


We should not forget that the most sophisticated and large scale attacks in Syria to date - bunker-buster mega-bombings and so on - have all been Israeli attacks designed to help the al-Qaeda rebels. Israel has plenty of poison gas, and the proven ability to mount large-scale terrorist attacks and blame its Arab enemies. So any big, sophisticated attack in Syria whose beneficiary is the Israeli-backed al-Qaeda rebels should be considered an Israeli attack until proven otherwise.

The Israelis, as Jeff Gates explains, are masters of game theory. They know that a big chemical weapons attack falsely blamed on Assad is a good bet to trigger a US air attack on Syria. Why? Because the US government, financed by Zionist banksters and penetrated by Zionist agents, never, ever exposes Israeli false flag attacks - even when the victims are American, as in the Lavon Affair, the USS Liberty incident, and 9/11.

But the Israelis also know that Russia has drawn its own “red line” in Syria. Russia will not tolerate large-scale Western airstrikes against Syria, and it will not accept Western-imposed regime change.

Russia has already suggested that the Syrian chemical attack is an anti-Assad false flag. China has agreed, pointing out that the claims about Assad's sponsorship of the chemical attack are comparable to Bush's lies about alleged Iraqi WMD in 2003.

Assad himself has said that he will respond to any large-scale Western airstrikes by launching devastating retaliation against Israel. He knows who the real enemy is.

Iraq, Iran, and Lebanon are lining up behind Syria and against Israel. Iranian officials have agreed that Israel would be the “first victim” of any big Western attack on Syria.

“We have strategic weapons and we are capable of responding,” Syrian official Khalaf Muftah has been quoted as saying.

So any major anti-Assad Western intervention will produce a hail of bombs falling on Tel Aviv. The entire Middle East (meaning the people, not the governments) will line up to support the countries and non-state actors lobbing those bombs.

Russia will defend Syria; China will at least lend moral and financial support.

The Americans and Europeans, who are dominated by their Zionist lobbies, will find themselves under immense pressure to escalate.

The world risks being dragged into World War III.

Why? Because Israel's shelf-life is expiring, and it is unwilling to “go gently into that good night.” The apartheid Zionist state is demographically unsustainable, despised and considered illegitimate by virtually the entire population of the Middle East, and opposed by a growing number of people worldwide. That is why Israeli leaders were crazy enough to risk staging the 9/11 false flag attack: They felt they had nothing to lose by acting, and that their only hope of achieving “Greater Israel” was to trick the West into an all-out war against the enemies of the Zionist state.

But now, a growing number of people around the world are rejecting the official story of 9/11. The inevitable exposure of the truth about 9/11 is a slow-motion earthquake that will bring down the US and Zionist empires.

So the Zionists are taking another massive gamble. They are hoping that leading the world to the brink of World War III - and possibly over the brink - will save their doomed “Greater Israel” project. A huge war would give the Zionists an excuse to expel non-Jews from historic Palestine, complete the ethnic cleansing that has been ongoing since 1948, and defuse the “demographic bomb.” And since the Zionists and their American stooges are losing relative strength each year, the hard-liners want to fight the big war now, while they think they still have an advantage.

The Syrian chemical false-flag appears to be Israel's biggest escalation of the “clash of civilizations” since 9/11. This time, the world must expose the truth rapidly, or risk the destruction of not just millions, but even tens or hundreds of millions of lives.

[TER]

Pay more attention to the Real News.

The UN is now saying it is VERY POSSIBLE that the REBELS were the ones that launched the Chemical Attack, not the Assad Regime.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/28/320870/israeli-falseflag-in-syria/

I understand that it is the rebels who launched it. In fact, I would put money on it if I was a betting man. I am also strictly AGAINST any intervention and assistance to the 'rebels'. In fact, I would be much more willing to support assistance to Assad if a side had to be chosen. I am not sure why you responded to my post with this post.

[DamianTV]

Not just you. I agree with what you said. But a lot of people still think it was Assad that was responsible for the attack. Its not attacking you with ammo, its GIVING you some ammo because the MSM is NOT reporting about the Rebels.

(Edited previous post. I see how it could be misunderstood as an "attack", my bad. Clarified as a General Reply)

[TER]

Not just you. I agree with what you said. But a lot of people still think it was Assad that was responsible for the attack. Its not attacking you with ammo, its GIVING you some ammo because the MSM is NOT reporting about the Rebels.

(Edited previous post. I see how it could be misunderstood as an "attack", my bad. Clarified as a General Reply)

No worries!

[Acala]

It was wrong for France to force the French people to finance intervention in the British colonies.

[Contumacious]

I agree with and understand the underlying practical and moral reasoning to not get involved, but i'm not asking for justification for whether we should or shouldn't help syria.

My question at its core is there reasoning for why it wouldn't be hypocritical for us to not help Syria or any country for that matter actively trying to gain independence or freedom when we were given help ourselves during our revolution?

Why do they "need" US help


And if thry need help why don't you either write them a check or pack up your duffle bag and go fight?

.