It's a very complex issue.

Indeed it is, but it didn't seem to make sense unless you looked back on corporate history as well as why John Kerry and Obama seem so adamant on invading Syria, when the majority of people on the planet oppose war. But think about it, for years we have been bashing Iran, but if we launch missiles into Syria, Iran has no choice but to declare war because of a defense treaty. ... Which is like how the first world war happened if you think about it... Dammit theres way too many variables.

It is really silly for the U.S to want to get involved, first off, Syrua has been at civil war for ages, getting involved will just make it worse, secondlly Syria is in a state of anarchy from what I hear, noones in charge, this seems like the U.S is vying for power over the country. Also I may have misheard but I believe Russia is supplying them with weapons (unless Im mixing this up with something else) so its just like the U.S government to want to get involved.

I really do not know what is going on with the U.S governemnt nowadays, and our British one is not any better.

Did you happen to read what I wrote in the journal above??? There is a lot more going on...

I did but the Syria situation is alot of speculation if you know what I mean, alot you hear may be false so I keep an open mind

I understand that but it makes sense in a way that this is still for corporate interests... with the NSA revelations too... and our non-interventions in nations that seriously needed the help to stop massacres??? But why start a so-called World War over corporate interests? that makes absolutely no sense...

Its kinda getting to the point where war is becoming profitable, which is absolutelly awful that thats what it seems our governments our resorting to

The us doesn't need to do this its not our fight or war but both the president and congress are wanting this because of the control over the dollar inflation but I think that if we do it will splinter the country even more

Obama logic:

We give the Syrina people assault weapons to fight back against their repressive government.

And

The American people don't need assault weapons.

Haha bullshit. America will become just like Cuba, Pakistan, and Korea. Our government is so fucking stupid.

Dude, that's just wishful thinking from a bunch of pricks who've spent the last five years trying to punish America for voting for a black man.

Financially, there's not much interest in Syria itself. The predominant interest is in the Mediterranean as a major shipping lane, and the only thing needed for this resource to be exploited would be stability in the region -- devil may care who actually comes out on top in the end. The only people for whom a conflict between the U.S. and Syria would be profitable would be the war industry douchebags who supply the missiles.

A better comparison would be Libya. Invasion was unpopular, but so was sitting on their asses while a psychotic dictator massacred dissenters during their funeral processions, which was why the U.S. finally contributed to an allied coalition provided aerial support. The Republicans squealed like pigs about it the whole way (even though they'd previously been squealing at Obama for his reluctance to go to war), but the U.S.'s military involvement was over in a matter of weeks.

The battle plan in Syria is expected to only last three days and is being pitched for the same reason as Libya; to stop a psychotic dictator from massacring dissenters, only now there's the additional incentive to punish / discourage the use of chemical weapons.

And the only reason there hasn't been a response yet is, once again, because the G.O.P. House (the same House that called for Obama to attack Libya, then attacked Obama for doing so) can't stop screaming about Obama wanting to destroy America (and turn everyone gay).

The "bad" rebels, frankly, are a moot point. Stability isn't being restored to the region by letting that prick stay in power, so it frankly doesn't matter if the rebels turn out to be no better. It also, frankly, does not matter whether the chemical weapons were used by Assad or the rebels -- the important thing is getting rid of them either way.

So there's only one real reason intervention in Syria is being opposed: To make President Blackenstein look bad.

You make a good point, but all I'm saying is America isn't learning from history. We have weapons to Pakistan to help us fight against Russia and Pakistan turned on us. We gave weapons to Cuba too, they turned on us. If we give weapons to Syria history says they will turn on us too. Also who is the government to say I don't need an AR-15? Did you know when they banned assault weapons in New York they redefined what an assault rifle is? An assault rifle now includes bolt action rifles and pistols. And how come political figures get to ieep these weapons? oh yea, because their guns are called "defense rifles" What a load of bull. We have the right to bare arms to help fight against threats. And in the constitution it states the American ppl can terminate any branch of government if they become out of control. The government knows they're going out of control and they're trying to keep us from being able to do anything about it. Castro, Kim-Jong Il, Stalin all took weapons from the public, history says Obama is next in line.

We don't need to invade Syria to mak Obama look bad. He's done that himself multiple times. He promised all this change, but I say, "It's been 5 years Obama and you've done nothing!" Sure it's not his fault we're this way, but don't promise something in your first year of presidency and get to year 5 with nothing yet.

I love America and what it stands for, but we lost out way. I'm willing to stand here and fight to being it back to what it once meant. But once we become a dictatorship, or the court system goes down I'm high tailing it out of here.

America is going down fast, we don't have long to stop it.

It's much more about just politics dude, if I'm being honest I was a democrat, but when the Snowden leaks happens I became an independent. I'm looking at both sides of the issue. There are many instances that we didnt help countries, one of the more recent ones I read about was in Africa where 5 million people were massacred in a number of years in the last decade. Another is when thousands were massacred in Tienanmen about 40 years ago, maybe more. Another where in the last month, 20,000 people in North Korea went "missing."

This is a hell of a lot more about politics, this isnt about the President because he's a goddamned liar while his secretary of state is an old lying douchebag who you can easily tell by one look at him that he's one of those bitter old men who sit idly by as the young and stupid fight wars for the old and bitter.

This is about money, resources, and making sure the dollar doesnt have something happen to it. If you look at every variable, you can find every issue pretty damn quickly. There is another thing, we don't like Iran even though Iran's government has recently became less crazy and much more stable, but Iran has a mutual defense pact with Syria that's currently in effect where Iranian soldiers are trying to help the Syrian government fight back against the rebels. If we attack Syria, that defense pact becomes active against us and Iran is practically obligated to declare war, something we (the American government, but not the people) would want in order to get rid of OPEC, if you remember how bad they screwed up our gas during the Carter Administration. If you also look at a map "Iraq is stable in terms of its oil pipeline." There is another pipeline that goes through Syria that also goes through Iraq, if we get involved in Syria its probably about getting that pipeline under control.

There is absolutely no "good" side to this war, the rebels currently have the Mujaheddin (dunno if i spelled that right) in their forces who are Islamist extremists who want to own the country and turn it into a proper islamic state that follows a stupid book from the year 600 or 800. The Syrian rebels were good at heart until the Islamists came in and stole the revolution. Assad is an asshole and sure he needs to be rid of, but at this point his government is a hell of a lot better than having a bunch of Islamists, even if he's already massecred 100,000 of his people.

ALSO about the chemical weapons, multiple times by multiple news sources, it turns out the rebels used the chemical weapons. I sadly don't have the time to look for citations on that. Assad wouldnt risk losing the war and keeping himself and his family alive by using chemical weapons, it makes absolutely no sense that he would do that. The rebels know we would get involved if said weapons were used so they used them after taking a military chemical facility in the north of the country.

So no, there isnt just "one" reason for intervention in Syria being opposed. There are many many different things, as well as it's not our fight at this point, there is no good side. Read into the news further and talk with people who are knowledgeable about the topic, because I'm damn sure at this point it isn't just about politics.

Honestly I think regardless what happens the US needs to stay out of it. It's stupid for the US to go 'help' another country when the US has too many problems of it's own. There is a saying: you can't help someone else till you can take care of yourself. Honestly this world has so many problems. The human race is always fighting with itself. I can't help but feel that it's honestly always going to be this way as long as so little amount of people are in charge of so many people. It leaves too much temptation for corruption and desperation to stay in power.

Something needed to be done about this two goddamned years ago, but "the world just fuckin' watched".

That's the only time I ever agree with a madman like General Shepherd.

It's going to turn into goddamned Kosovo all over again.

It probably will become that but wasn't kosovo a small country in eastern Europe??? I can't remember, but I apologize for not being entirely knowledgeable on what happened in Kosovo. I'm sorry. Just read my bigger comment above and you will see what I mean about what's going on.

Kosovo was a province in the Balkan Mountains region of the country of Yugoslavia. The US was criticized for its standoff involvement in what was regarded as 'not our war', paralleling Syria today.

Ima gunna throw in my two cents here.
There are a number of reasons why the Syria problem is getting far more attention than say North Korea or even Iran at this point.
1. Syria is in the Middle East which is a popular topic for the media.
2. Obama backed himself into a corner with the "red line" nonsense and would loose political face if he doesn't act.
3. Syria is an ally if Iran and the US hates Iran.
4. Also a friend if Russia who recently slapped the US in the face with the snowden incident so this would be a way at gettin back at them.
5. But by far the biggest reason why this is getting a lot of coverage in my opinion is because of Syria's southern neighbor, Israel.
If you were to take Syria and dump it off the coast of Africa it would not get any major attention because its not near oil rich counties like Saudi Arabia and not near Israel. Every major miltary action by the US was against countries where it has or affects its interests. Not because of some breach of world law. That's just justification not the reason.

Your pretty much right here but again, there are many more factors that fall into play, I myself have studied history for a long time and more recently corporate history. In this day and age we have to keep an open eye to every possible option, even if it may be a conspiracy, hell maybe some conspiracies are crazy, but you can't rule them out, especially after the whole snowden thing.

I studied history as well. Went to college for it :3 Syria itself is a hodgepodge country lik most of the Middle East it was a partition of the old Ottoman Empire given to France after WWI, which is why France right now the only country supporting us. Just like in Libya the I think the French feel responsible for helping their former colonies. A gays back to my point the violence is caused by different religious and ethic groups that were put together who for the most part hate each other. This is still happening in Iraq and across Africa. So it's not a real shocker at least to me there's violence in Syria as well.

What do you think the chances are of us goiing to war with South America because they are defying our government??? I'm quite curious as to what you think.

South America? somewhere between slim to zero. If your referring to say the whole Snowden incident with some of the Latin and South American Countries offering snowden long term political asylum. No I don't think we'd use that for a Cause to Invade or Declare war on any South American Country. The Only Country I can see that being a possibility is Argentina if they decide to try retaking the Falkens from the British being an Ally of the UK I'd expect the US to at least support the brits if not aid them directly but I don't think Argentina is naive enough to think they could win such a war against the UK never mind its allies. What the US might do to said Countries I said earlier like Venuszla, Nicaragua, and Bolivia? I think the US might retaliate in an economic way...some folks might boycott goods from said countries or the Government might remove benfits they are receiving from the US. I don't see the US using its military in Latin or South America unless invited for some reason.

To Be quite honest currently besides the Syria Situation. If everything remains the same I don't see the US starting any war. There are a Few Countries I'd be watching in the future where war would be inevitable.

What keeps me from being optimistic about the future global warming set aside is the way Pakistan and India "STILL" look at each other as enemies for the most part. Both are Nuclear armed and one of them, Pakistan, is politically unstable.
North Korea is lead by a Young Dictator who in my opinion is now most likely a puppet of the Military or Fears being ousted by them. on top of it all he's rather erratic and unpredictable. So he might strike out at the South to show to his military that he's tough. what would make it worse is in the past South Korea would make a lot of noise but do nothing in the end. recently they've been sounding a tad more hawkish and might strike back with equal or greater force escalating it into a full blown war.
Iran is another one because of Israel's stance that it will bomb Iran with or without us if Iran gets Nukes. We would get dragged in after the Iranians would expectantly retaliate against them and us due to our alliance with them.

Those are the only situations at the moment that could cause problems...other countries to look at for issues are Saudi Arabia and China if some sort of Revolution coalesces bubbles to the surface and becomes a full blown civil war. I think its unlikely that either will happen but it Might.