The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2013 AFPObama says U.S. has 'moral' obligation in Syria
WASHINGTON©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2013 AFP
10 Comments
Login to comment
jeff198527
Don't we have a moral obligation to our own people before a bunch of jihadist foreigners?
HonestDictator
No, I don't really think we do.
Serrano
I'm pretty sure HonestDictator's comment was in reference to the headline, and not jeff198527's question.
What about the rest of the world's moral obligation in Syria?
noriyosan73
"Moral" obligation is code for "we are broke and we can't afford another war. Good luck."
Tuntematon Sotilas
Actually...no, it doesn't.
SuperLib
Everyone has a moral obligation to help. But since we all aren't going to do it, I don't see why one of us has to.
nath
Oh of course, Syria is an easy prey due to it's non nuclear armed nature!
gelendestrasse
There's a moral obligation to close Gitmo too, but that hasn't happened yet. Syria is a much bigger problem and Obama doesn't have the brass for the job. I'm not even sure the US should bother, but I really doubt that wet noodle president is up to the task. If the opinion polls in the US say no then it's not going to happen.
jeff198527
If it were a clear threat like North Korea or the Mexican drug cartels it'd be a different story, but Syria isn't a threat to us.
Bluescript
The only way to do that is to stop aiding the foreign fighters, who are doing most of the killing.
According to the UN, the evidence is pointing towards the so-called rebels. Plus, the Syria forces are winning this war, they have absolutely no reason to use chemical weapons.
It was not "flawed intelligence", it was a pack of lies; and there has yet to be any accountability for those who lied.