62% say 'stay out of syria'

[spanone]

*** Six in 10 oppose U.S. intervention in Syria: Want another reason why the Obama administration is walking very carefully when it comes to Syria? According to a brand-new New York Times/CBS poll, 62% of Americans say the United States DOES NOT have a responsibility to do something about the fighting in Syria.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/2013/april13b.trn-early-forpol.pdf

[get the red out]

1. Stay out of everywhere

That's my poll answer for the foreseeable future.

[Laelth]

2. And if our oligarchs want war ...

It would not matter if 99% of Americans opposed intervention in Syria, it would happen anyway. It is quite obvious that our oligarchs could care less what the American people want. They own our government and will get their way without regard to popular opinion.

-Laelth

[graham4anything]

3. FDR didn't have to go to WW2 either, but he should have years earlier

how many millions died waiting for it?

[Jackpine Radical]

4. Just out of curiosity--

Could you detail your history of combat experience for us?

[graham4anything]

5. I can detail the # of deaths in the gas chambers and the fact that I am Jewish.

and my grandfather's brother who was one family member who refused to leave, and the only one who had a gun and blew his brains out, not wanting to give up material items.
I miss not knowning him.Also wish he didn't have a gun. None of my relatives that left needed one or ever had one either.

It is possible FDR getting in early could have saved 10 million lives or many, many more.
But he was not bold enough to go against public discourse.

Should Israel be threatened, or others with WMDs by Syria or Iran, let's drop some drones.

No need for groundwar or any troops, let's send in the drones, as Richard Clarke said "Drones are the most humane form of warfare".

and yes, there are bad people out there.
It is not a video game.

[Arctic Dave]

6. And how is any of your story FDR or the US' fault?

Where is written that we must be involved in fighting other people's wars?

[graham4anything]

7. We are the world. The world is US. Can't say USA without saying US

remember, we need the world more than they need us. Our entire day to day living is dependent on all those other places.

This is the new world. We no longer party like its Ronald Reagan's day.

[Arctic Dave]

11. Then they need to "US" themselves.

Can't be independent without an I.

[Jackpine Radical]

8. I am very sorry for the great evils experienced by the Jews throughout history.

Perhaps we could have intervened earlier, or differently, in 1939 or something, and many lives would have been saved. I don't know. I'm by no means a specialist in that period and try not to weigh in with opinions in area where I know so little.

Personally, I'm a combat veteran of Vietnam, and I have a deep and negative visceral reaction to the thought of war--any war. 60,000 Americans and untold numbers of Southeast Asians died for no good purpose. I think both Iraq and Afghanistan will turn out to be misadventures of similar magnitude.

I guess I'm not a total pacifist, but I really don't want to see us involved in any more imperial wars in the Middle East.

[leftyohiolib]

9. 90% wanted background checks -

if us starts a war they will be fighting russia and china - this is prbably putins attempt to flatten the us the way reagan did to russia during the cold war. just by causing us to spend all our money on war

[agentS]

10. We have a deal with the Russians

We won't directly intervene as long as Syrian government keeps chemical weapons off battlefield.
Recent events may say otherwise.
IF the new reports are true, then it's 'game on'.
IF not, then we stick to the sidelines.

This action doesn't necessarily have to be all on us. The Turks or the Israelis can pitch-in on this, or deal with wackos on their turf with chemical weapons in their backpacks. Their choice...