Would you be OK with targeted assassinations in Syria?

[apples and oranges]

vs full scale war?

[ZombieHorde]

1. I don't know enough about Syria to judge a course of action,

but I generally prefer targeted assassinations over full scale war.

[MannyGoldstein]

2. Only if we first set a bright line that must be passed

before we initiate this action, and it's applied fairly to all countries.

[graham4anything]

3. Anything John Kerry says we should do, is fine by me.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

7. Would we ever expect different?

[hughee99]

12. Wow... just wow. n/t

[hobbit709]

20. Then what makes us morally superior to others?

If it's OK for us to do it, what stops anyone else from doing it to us and using the SAME legal justification.

[TwilightGardener]

4. I support doing nothing except providing humanitarian relief

and preventing spillover fighting at allies' borders. Now, if chemical weapons are being used on a large scale, and they start wiping out whole towns or something, then the international community should respond--not just us.

[Arctic Dave]

5. Would you be OK with targeted assassinations in the US?

What the fuck kind of OP is this?

[apples and oranges]

15. Have you been watching the news?

Some people are asking for war. This OP addresses an alternative which may cause less deaths.

[Arctic Dave]

16. Both are idiotic.

Would you be OK with another nation carrying out targeted assassinations on US soil or not?

[apples and oranges]

18. Obviously not, but I also wouldn't want to be bombed

for something my government did.

[Carolina]

32. Right on, Arctic Dave,

The very same question crossed my mind when I read the OP.

WTF are people thinking. We invade, we drone and we conduct assassinations... we are #1 in some of the worst ways.

[ColesCountyDem]

6. That's a very slippery slope.

I'm not at all comfortable 'going there'.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Is that the 3rd Way style of diplomacy?

I would "choose" neither.

[leftyohiolib]

9. why even ask - it's not like the people have any say in what the government does

[malaise]

10. Would you be OK with them in your country n/t

[bhikkhu]

11. One of the few kinds of situations where I would

...as in, most wars are started by wealthy top-tier oligarchs, and fought by poor ordinary people who have to deal with rules like, say, don't retreat or you will be executed on the spot.

I've always been unimpressed by the virtues of war where the decision makers lounge in extravagant comfort, far from harm, while the people fighting the war are entirely expendable, little more than sums on a spreadsheet. If you took out the decision makers and let the ordinary people be, how is that worse?

[Javaman]

13. Oh how far we have fallen down the rabbit hole...

when questions such as this are asked.

[justiceischeap]

14. If we had absolutely only 2 choices in the matter (which we don't)

Then I would vote for targeted assassination instead of full out war. That said, we don't have those only two options, so the question is moot.

[datasuspect]

17. only if they did 9-11

[moondust]

19. Like knocking off Assad with a drone?

I remember targeted assassination of Saddam being discussed online before the Iraq invasion, though it obviously didn't happen. Syria sounds like a similar sectarian morass.

If you knocked off Assad would you then have to knock off the next guy in line? And the next? And in ten years will somebody who would like to see your President disappear do the same?

[TheKentuckian]

21. Neither. Provide humanitarian relief, arm the rebels if anything, and let the Syrians figure it out.

[leftynyc]

23. NO arms

We have no idea where those arms will end up. Let the Arab League or the UN handle it - we should do absolutely nothing.

[tralala]

22. We're exporting jihad instead of democracy now?

Strange times we live in.

[MrSlayer]

24. To what end?

What would be the point of us getting involved there at all?

We should mind our own damn business for once.

[quinnox]

25. No

"vs full scale war". That is known as a false dilemma. Because there are other choices.

[SheilaT]

26. And if some other country were doing

targeted assassinations, would you be okay with that?

Let's say Cuba does targeted assassinations in Bolivia. Or Afghanistan does them in India. Or North Korea does them in this country.

[leveymg]

27. Who do you want to assassinate? How many collateral lives lost is acceptable? When do they start

assassinating our political figures and shooting down our airliners?

If you can answer those questions first, I'll answer your question.

[hrmjustin]

29. Lets just stay out of it.

[apples and oranges]

30. That's my preference as well

But I'm hearing more and more talking heads on MSNBC calling for intervention.

[hrmjustin]

31. My reaction is let them talk and leave our armed forces alone and at home.

[pediatricmedic]

33. Not OK with either option.

We need to stay out of it.

[leveymg]

34. Ding, ding, ding. Answer of the thread!

You get your choice of one of these quality cigars in my pocket here or any Kewpie Doll on the top shelf.

[FarCenter]

35. Only if we use copies of Israeli drones that can't be traced to the US