{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by DeclinedA01:
5/13/2014 1:17:38 AM
6
Would it have made a difference in Syria and elsewhere in the world had we, the US, struck Syria via air or naval bombardment after verifying they had used chemical weapons?
English
-
Depends on if they were more than just punitive strikes. If we were to strike, it would have probably had to been more than just a few on a few targets for "punishment". We would have actually had to "bomb the shit" out of them to make any difference. We would have also had to target several AQ/ISIS positions to mitigate their influence and power, as well. Was I for punitive strikes? To an extent. I thought something should have been done in Syria and that was the first step. As far as credibility is concerned, it would have maintained it.
-
[quote]As far as credibility is concerned, it would have maintained it.[/quote] So by not striking Syria we appear weaker, to some extent?
-
Some say we don't, but I sort of align with the faction that say we do.
-
Edited by DeclinedA01: 5/13/2014 1:28:26 AMInteresting. I'll be taking an intro IR class in the fall, by the way.
-
Good to hear. I will always be willing to help, if needed.
-
I shouldn't need help, but thanks.
