Comments about ‘Letter: American politicians shouldn't get away with lawlessness’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, Sept. 7 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

Oh Where oh Where were all these sentiments 10 years ago.
It may have saved us trillions of dollars and thousands of lives.

I guess a war is only as good as who suggests it.

(disclaimer, i strongly believe that we should NOT get involved in Syria at this time)

Baron Scarpia
Logan, UT

I'm going to wait till Tuesday night to see what Obama says... think how many times the majority of the world sat idle, allowing atrocities occur because it was inconvenient or a threat to our economy -- for example, the rise of Hitler during the Depression. America couldn't be bothered with Hitler's rise as we were trying to fix economic challenges at home and thought that he was Europe's problem, not ours (similar to Palin's isolationist assertion recently, "Let Allah decide.").

Is Syria today the Germany of the 1930s? Perhaps not, but we invaded Grenada and Nicaragua on lesser offenses.

Let Obama make his case before the American people.

10CC
Bountiful, UT

Assad completely agrees with this letter.

higv
Dietrich, ID

There is such a thing as international laws? I didn't know that. There are treaties people sign and even we need to have order among countries. To preserve freedom and protect interests war may be necessary at times to free people from Hitler. It needs to be approved by Congress though. Syria I don't see reason to be over there. Our military saves many innocent lives though.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

I suspect president Obama is envisioning something more like Libya than Iraq. And he's in no danger, because dick cheney is still a free man.

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

JoeBlow, agreed. The last time we saw this many Republican doves was probably when Regan attacked Grenada, and then told Congress, hey guess what I did. Of course the Repubs all stood up and screamed when Regan sold arms secretly to Iran (our sworn enemy) in direct opposition to American law. I think that's called treason, and if Obama did it there is no question it would be treason.

I do however support the President this time with a strike. First of all I don't think it's reasonable to approach the world as either or. Either you respond to all tragedies or respond to none. I think the civilized world can and should draw lines. Secondly, I think there are ways to strike military targets that will degrade the military and their ability to use chemical weapons. Thirdly I trust the President to not escalate our involvement, because I do oppose boots on the ground regime change.

I naturally oppose war, but not all military actions. The worlds a complicated place

casual observer
Salt Lake City, UT

If Mr. Obama wants to punish Assad he should follow the rule of law and ask that Assad be indicted before the War Crimes Tribunal in the Hague. Most countries would support that. Pursuing a costly, illegal and ill-advised bombing campaign just to prove that Mr. Obama is decisive is a beginners mistake. Revenge is best served cold.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

From the Title --
I thought this was going to be about Utah AG John Swallow.

but
This is the Deseret News.
Were;
Republican = Good, always.
Democrat = Bad, always.

As to Syria --

I'm against it, just like I have been for 12 years with the Bush's Wars.
[and called every nasty name in the book for it by Republicans].
and it is because I'm an American!
and I know the difference between what is right and what is wrong.

Good = Good
Bad = Bad

regardless of political party.

BTW - IMHO - The judgment for who stands up for what is right vs. what is wrong goes double in Utah.

Do you here that [Bush wars good - Obama wars bad] hypocrites?

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

@higv
Dietrich, ID

To preserve freedom and protect interests war may be necessary at times to free people from Hitler.

=========

You do recall that WWII had already been raging for 2 years before the U.S. was attacked [Pearl Harbor} and the U.S. entered the war [with a plea from the President and full congressional declaration].

2 Million humans died in machete attacks in Rwanda and America sat back and did nothing.

If you are going to use Genocide or Humanitarian reasons for war - we need to be consistent.
If we are only protecting our wives, our children, our country and out freedom [per the Book of Mormon] then were should.

I just want some consistently and stop picking and choosing what efforts are worthy of intervention and which aren't --
Because to me [as a Veteran] they seem politically phony and all about money.

[Was it ever occur to anyone that maybe - just maybe - WE have subtly become the bad guys, being controlled by the Gadiantons - who take the treasures of the earth and buy up armies and navies, and seek to reign with blood and horror?]

Badgerbadger
Murray, UT

I wonder if war in Syria is the Obama's next jobs program targeted at all those young men who can't find a job?

wrz
Pheonix, AZ

@JoeBlow:
"Oh Where oh Where were all these sentiments 10 years ago."

Back in the day the objective was to secure Kuwaiti oil (and perhaps even Saudi oil). Saddam had his eye on the oil in Kuwait. What better way to bring America to her knees than to control her source of energy?

"It may have saved us trillions of dollars and thousands of lives."

But you'd be walking or riding a bike to work each day.

"I guess a war is only as good as who suggests it."

And who votes on it... such as John Kerry, Joe Biden, and Hilary Clinton among many other democrats.

Sal
Provo, UT

The writer says too many innocent lives would be lost if American strikes Syria. I guess the 100,000 innocent Syrian lives already lost don't count?

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

Where was all of this 10+ years ago?

If Romney were President, would all of these GOP doves still be wanting peace? Would they still be questioning the motives and objectives of this war? Or would they have led the charge in another war just as they did the previous two, morals, motives, and objectives be darned?

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"Back in the day the objective was to secure Kuwaiti oil (and perhaps even Saudi oil). Saddam had his eye on the oil in Kuwait. What better way to bring America to her knees than to control her source of energy?"

Thanks wrz. I will add that the the list of reasons we went into Iraq.

Why weren't the American people told that was the reason.

We heard about WMD, then when those were not found, we heard about Liberating the Iraqi people.
But, never about Kuwaiti oil.

Are you suggesting that Bush lied about the reasons for invading Iraq?

Badgerbadger
Murray, UT

Sal,

The only ones this admin cares about are the last 1500. The other 98500 were lost without them batting an eyelash. That is why so many of us have a hard time thinking that they really care at all.

wrz
Pheonix, AZ

@Sal:
"The writer says too many innocent lives would be lost if American strikes Syria. I guess 100,000 innocent Syrian lives already lost don't count?"

Americans count for more. Mideast folks have been slaying themselves for centuries. We try not slay Americans because we think life is precious.

@The Real Maverick:
"If Romney were President, would all of these GOP doves still be wanting peace?"

For sure GOP doves don't want war... unless there's a good reason... such as imminent danger to Americans... which there isn't in Syria.

@JoeBlow:
"Why weren't the American people told that was the reason."

We were. George H. W. Bush, the president's father, said it. I guess you weren't listening.

"We heard about WMD, then when those were not found, we heard about Liberating the Iraqi people."

WMDs weren't found because Saddam shipped them to Syria in anticipation of war (read Georges Sada's book, Saddam's Secrets). Now Syria is using them on his people.

"Are you suggesting that Bush lied about the reasons for invading Iraq?"

There wasn't just one reason. Did you not think Bush could walk and chew gum at the same time?

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"We were. George H. W. Bush, the president's father, said it. I guess you weren't listening."

Oh, I was listening. I just didn't know you decided to change wars and decades on the discussion.

Also, just cause Mr Sada wrote something in a book, does not make it true. His assertions are by no means accepted as the most plausible explanation.

wrz
Pheonix, AZ

@JoeBlow:
"Oh, I was listening. I just didn't know you decided to change wars and decades on the discussion."

Politicians often say one thing and mean another. Did you want Obama's list?

"Also, just cause Mr. Sada wrote something in a book, does not make it true."

Sada was one of Saddam's most trusted generals. If anyone had the inside dope, he did.

"His assertions are by no means accepted as the most plausible explanation."

Often the truth is not accepted... especially if it doesn't fit a political agenda.

higv
Dietrich, ID

@ Open Minded Mormon Neville Chamberlin wanted to leave Hitler alone let him have this land. Dictators promises are made to be broken. People were upset we didn't go to war sooner.

The first George Bush asked for congressional approval after a deadline as did the 2nd one. Congress approved those wars. The Holocaust could of ended sooner if we went in sooner. people didn't want us intervening there.

We can't be everywhere and were there are no vital interests need to stay away. However some places if there is economic or political interests than there may be reasons to be involved.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments