Punish Syria with targeted missile strikes

  • Article by: Bloomberg News Editorial
  • Updated: August 29, 2013 - 1:10 PM

Syria’s President Bashar Assad needs to be shown that using chemical weapons against his opponents won’t be tolerated. If he has used such weapons — or if he impedes investigation of the scene of the latest atrocity in his country — the United States and its allies should respond with force.

  • 23
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
jd55604Aug. 28, 13 7:42 PM

It is not the role of the U.S. to "punish" countries that have not attacked us and pose no risk to our national security. These republocrat chicken hawks seemed obsessed with spilling our country's blood and treasure in order to placate their Islamic bloodlust.

31
3
lordhawhaw1Aug. 28, 13 8:16 PM

Questions for our trusted and beloved Government. Assad isn't an idiot, his side is winning. Why would Assad risk foreign intervention by using chemical weapons on such a limited scale for a tiny tactical victory? The benefit does not outweigh the risk. How do we know the rebels didn't do it to get sympathy and support? The rebels had a lot more to gain from this than Assad. Where is the actual proof? Maybe the Feds can trot out Susan Rice again to tell us the "Truth", like she did after Benghazi? When did Syria attack the United States? Did I miss that news story? How is Syria in our nations vital interest that we risk yet more of our blood and treasure to do what exactly, teach Assad a lesson? Pray tell; when did the world bequeath us that authority? Is dropping a few more missiles on yet another country whose people often engage in blood feuds that span generations a good idea for us let alone for our future generations? We are 17 trillion in debt; who is paying for this latest installment of our brilliant foreign policy? When is Congress going to declare war on Syria per our Constitution? You know, that dusty document that used to set limits on government power so we the people could be free? Oh, yes Congress is not in session even as President foot in mouth dares Syria to cross a line and his Secretary of State (Remember him? The guy who threw his Nam medals away in disgust wants to send our kids into an even more pointless war than Vietnam was. Obscenity anyone?). Where are the real Conservatives opposing any unconstitutional use of our military? McCain and Boehner are to busy cheering on Obama. On the bright side Russian and Chinese arms dealers stand to make a lot of cash should we send our kids to fight and die for such a worthy cause.

27
22
hermajestyAug. 28, 1310:12 PM

I can't believe I'm agreeing with lordhawhaw1, but he's right. Assad is a dictator, but his opponents are no angels either. This is a civil war. The U.S. should stay out of it.

39
0
wellthereugoAug. 28, 1310:50 PM

We've learned nothing from Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet we still trample on ground that we have no place in trampling. Syria is a mess, a wholesale mess. One side a dictator hell bent on staying in control, the other a rebel faction lead by no one (best case extremists). There are far too many negatives to outweigh any positive punitive results. We are heading down a dangerous path less congressional or UN resolution (which is doomed to fail with Russia's/China's unequivocal veto). Any unilateral strike is a folly with major repercussions that we do not seem to acknowledge. It smacks of 2003. Hands off Syria, let them sort it out. We are over extended, out of treasure and out of will, at least for this pimple.

32
0
uknowthagodAug. 29, 13 1:33 AM

so where is the evidence that it was Assad who used these weapons? and the person who wrote this article is beyond delusional.

20
16
comment229Aug. 29, 13 5:39 AM

Further.... who are the rebels? or should we name them "freedom fighters?" We supported freedom fighters in Afghanistan, remember? Guess who they turned out to be? We demanded "democracy" in Egypt, got Morsi, and then said it was wrong. We took out Hussein in Iraq so there would be peace in that country. Fat chance! And now we are considering this? Let the Arab/Muslim world deal with their own culture and mess. If genocide is objectionable to you, where have you been all these years with it happening in several black African nations? Some Americans only want convenient truths. There are none.

29
0
palsarAug. 29, 13 7:31 AM

"If he has used such weapons — or if he impedes investigation of the scene of the latest atrocity in his country — the United States and its allies should respond with force." --- Wow, does this sound exactly like Iraq? They used chemical weapons on the Kurds. They impeded U.N. inspectors. Why is it the U.S. and their allies' obligation to "respond with force?"

18
11
garcialaterAug. 29, 13 7:54 AM

Assad didn't use chemical weapons. This whole thing is about natural gas pipelines. The US goes to war and kills innocent civilians not for self defense or "humanitarian" reasons, but for economic reasons. Money. Follow it.

6
20
alansonAug. 29, 13 8:52 AM

Ever since "Remember the Maine!" the US has rushed into combat, egged on by the yellow journalism of newspaper publishers with an axe to grind. And if you think BLOOMBERG News doesn't have an axe to grind, you must not be aware that the mayor of New York still harbors presidential ambitions. This conflict has been ongoing for years. Delaying our response will make little difference to the outcome. It won't hurt to make sure we have all the facts about Assad's use of chemicals before we take on the hazards of unintended consequences of military action.

13
0
firefight41Aug. 29, 13 9:11 AM

Syria’s President Bashar Assad needs to be shown that using chemical weapons against his opponents won’t be tolerated. If he has used such weapons — or if he impedes investigation of the scene of the latest atrocity in his country — the United States and its allies should respond with force *************** The United States should stay out of this issue completely!

17
13

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT