Syria has warned of global chaos should the U.S. strike. Govt and their corporate partners often use war as the “solution” to their self-induced problems because the real solution would require them to admit they were wrong, lose money, or both. If the Miley Cyrus and NSA mirrors of societal decay cannot distract the public from the govt-induced economic collapse, then war can always be relied upon to do the trick. Since the rule of law and Constitution are ignored almost as much as Martin Armstrong, why should we expect the required declaration of war from OUR REPRESENTATIVES?
Before we stick our hands into another hornets nest, wouldn’t it be prudent to ask a few questions? Like: Who used the chemical weapons? How do we know? With al-Assad having a clear advantage, and UN inspectors having just arrived, why would al-Assad use chemical weapons? What if it was the US-backed rebels that used the weapons? Did we not learn anything from Iraq? Since it was clear we would be involved militarily before the chemical attacks, what exactly is our fundamental reason for entering the war?
It certainly appears that the public is asking themselves these questions, as only 9% of poll respondents said we should intervene militarily in Syria (making this issue even less popular than Congress, which has a 15% approval rating). The big question is: will the people do anything about it when the President, once again, trounces on their opinions and rights.
For the 9% that think war is the answer, you may want to review this history lesson first.