ThePest179

67

Wish granted, you now quadruple post. I wish that there was something to do!

395876928634539208

9876543210

57435

*Slowly walks away*

Best wish EVER!

4

Error4fg56f5gf44f5g5676578t643257gmn7t5765v6

333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333

You. Are. An. IDIOT!!!!!!! Would you go near an alien larva-creature! I don't think so!

Banned for not giving me a reason to ban you.

4

Banned for not making sense.

79

Hello? anyone there? Helloooooooooooo?

It means we are more civilized, but in any case, I don't think being ruled by a dictator for most of their life compels them to use democracy now.

apologies. Just got impatient after a while

discuss anything about the SCP Foundation, such as: 1. Favorite SCP's 2. Containment procedures 3. Good stories about the Foundation http://www.scp-wiki.net/

And there is the problem. we need to save lives in general by taking away Assad's chemical weapons, and therefore preventing their use by Hezbollah and/or al-Qaeda. A few American doughboys for a lot of Muslim civilians and Israelis. Sounds like a fair trade.

Some people want the US to get involved in this war. Not me, not anymore. Two oppressive sides (which just want to set up their own fascist government) are vying for power. The opposition is joining the ranks of the most notorious terrorist group in history (al-Qaeda) while the government massacres its own people, setting up mass graves, while also using Sarin nerve gas to kill more efficiently. And while everyone wants a cease-fire, they disagree on what the terms should be for that cease-fire, with Russia supporting the Assad regime and the US (barely) supporting the opposition. Americans disagree on what to do, intervene or not intervene? From what I can tell, most people are jumping for joy at the thought of Muslims killing Muslims, even if the killings involve mass executions and heavy civilian casualties, and especially if it means saving American lives. I am for non-intervention, but only because of the fact that the US can't find a suitable way to end the conflict and spread some freedom that people will accept. I am uncaring about American lives though, which is why I hate most non-interventionists, citing "we need to save American lives" instead of saying "we need to save lives". What they fail to realize though, is that not intervening may kill more people than intervening, and here's why: (Assad wins) 1. Iran will get a new friend. 2. Syria will share chemical weapons with Iran and Hezbollah. 3. Israel gets attacked with chemical weapons. 4. A larger Shia-Sunni war occurs. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (Opposition wins) 1. al-Qaeda will get chemical weapons. 2. The US gets attacked with chemical weapons. 3. The US and/or NATO attack areas suspected of harboring al-Qaeda. 4. A large war is fought in the Middle East between NATO/US and "Mujahideen". 5. A larger Shia-Sunni war occurs. (the first two in each of the scenarios are guaranteed) Now, if the US intervenes in the civil war, they must be careful, as even intervention can lead to terrible consequence (intervention would mean no fly zones and taking away Assad's chemical weapons) such as an increase in chemical weapon use and an increase in ethnic violence (the Si 'ties moving to a different part of the Middle East and causing trouble somewhere else). So intervene, or don't intervene?

Minecraft Xbox 360.