I just want to specify that I wasn't citing Captain Kremmen in particular, because I wasn't sure what the exact reason was for his personal opposition. My accusations are meant for people who believe Assad is knowingly massacring thousands of innocents with heavy foreign backing, that a US or allied intervention is begged by large numbers of Syrians and could potentially save more lives than it costs, and that Assad could be stopped or deterred without costing US lives or empowering Al Qaeda, but prefer that nothing be done and condemn those who act in order to prevent America for gaining any further influence.
Billvon's comments about the importance of respecting the Russian veto as well as watching some of the anti-war protests were what triggered me to make my inference, but I wouldn't put Captain Kremmen under the same roof because he's consistently opined that he thinks US intervention will cause even larger numbers of innocents to die. All the same, I'd like to see him put forth some sort of strategy to either settle the issue in Syria or else to contain Assad's allies and prevent the violence and aggression from spreading to innocents in other countries, because I can't see how anything but the worst possible outcome is bound to happen without either getting more foreigners involved in Syria, or else forcing all the existing foreigners on both sides to leave.
I meant it along the lines that his comment was a prime example of what you pointed out.
But he keeps going on about US intervention and its evils in its response to this chemical attack, and how he believes many more civilians will die as a result. He says nothing and offers no criticism of Russia's intervention right from the start.
His position is deeply hypocritical.
Can civilians die if the US does a tactical strike against his chemical weapon stash? Yes. But how many more will die if he uses them again? How many more will die if the Convention suddenly means absolutely nothing and becomes worthless?
To put it into some perpsective. In 10 years, the war in Iraq has claimed
just over 115,000 civilian deaths. In two and a half years in Syria,
a conservative figure of the death toll is over 100,000, with civilians making up over a third of that conservative estimate, the largest chunk.
However unless Assad moves tens of thousands of people to the locations where they (stockpiles of chemical weapons) are hidden, then it will not be more, as Kremmen seems to believe it will be.
Now add chemical weapons into the fray and watch that death toll rise.
Kremmen's outrage is misplaced. This war has been going on for over 2.5 years. A conservative death toll puts it at over 100,000 deaths as a result of this war. The refugees out of this war is well over 2 million. In all of this, the US has not intervened. Even when politicians in the US begged Obama to at least help the rebels by providing them with arms and support, he refused. Russia on the other hand has been arming, training and providing support to Assad's troops.
And who is Kremmen angry at and why is he angry? That the US may use some missiles to try to prevent further chemical attacks.
It's obscene.
