Syrian involvement
2013-08-31 14:43:40.461125+00 by
Dan Lyke
2 comments
I was not terribly fond of Norman Solomon's War Made Easy![[Wiki]](/adbanners/lookingglass.png)
, but having seen it, and having watched the past decade of U.S. military adventuring in Afghanistan and Iraq, it's hard to not view foreign policy in the context of excuses to keep the military industrial complex running.
So if you've got some questions on foreign policy and how the U.S. should move forward given the current events in the Middle East, may I recommend listenting to Planet Money Episode 482: Why the U.S. keeps sending weapons to Egypt, and then you can read Myth-Busting the Looming War With Syria and Before You Conclude That 'Precision' Bombing Makes Sense With Syria ...
[ related topics:
Interactive Drama User Interface Movies History Space & Astronomy Sports Guns Currency
]
comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):
#Comment Re: made: 2013-09-03 11:43:37.063109+00 by:
meuon
I had to think about this for a while, but I think there is no way to do anything meaningful in the middle east via military action except kill people (including our own) and supporting our military industrial business sector. I'm adopting a "less is more" stance when it comes to being involved in other countries internal politics and wars. We have enough of our own issues to work on... adding more violence in a violent situation that does not directly affect the USA is not an answer.
#Comment Re: made: 2013-09-03 20:06:59.835677+00 by:
Dan Lyke
Fucking brilliant: Teju Cole’s 9 questions about Britain you were too embarrassed to ask.
And so, even if my satire in hindsight proves to have been insufficiently surgical (it seems unlikely these particular British chemicals did not get to Syria as earlier reported, though the export license for them was indeed issued, long after the war there had begun), the general point still holds: we should imagine what it would be like to bomb London punitively.