20130829

29AUG13 Inconvenient Information

With regard to Syria, many are comparing the WMD situation to that in Iraq; and most news stories go something like this Sky News Report: http://news.sky.com/story/1134423/ghost-of-iraq-wmd-haunts-intelligence-agencies "The temptation among some viewing Syria this week has been to see it as Iraq WMD the sequel."

Never mind that the United States did PLENTY of WMD material and weapons throughout Iraq.  One of the more positive items to fallout of the WikiLeaks document leak (for which Bradley Manning has been sentenced to 35 years in prison for leaking), are the intelligence reports stating this fact.  A fact overlooked by every major news organization that talks about the "Iraq WMD scandal" (in the above example, Sky News, but CNN, Fox, NBC, ABC, Huffington Post, and others are just as guilty).

Whats my source?  Well, for one, if you downloaded the WikiLeaks documentation....  Search for it.  Or, you can take a look at these forgotten articles from 2010:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/us_did_find_iraq_wmd_AYiLgNbw7pDf7AZ3RO9qnM

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/

Trivial amounts you might say.  But then, so is actual hard evidence of 'atrocities' committed by US military personnel against civilians, and I mean that by way of actual war crimes and other crimes (other crimes being assaults, thefts, etc which sadly are unavoidable in any human population).  Fact is, US military personnel are more likely victims of violent crimes by US military personnel than actual innocent Iraqi civilians (especially in cases of rape, just check out the Army sexual assault numbers...).

To say that Iraqi weapons didn't end up in Syria is ignorant.  To say large quantities NEVER made it is ludicrous.  As the WikiLeaks examples show, its probable.  Debatable, yes.  Requiring verification, certainly.
On that note...  I'm largely against actions against Syria.  Why?  Well, strategically that ship sailed when US ground forces largely were pulled from Iraq.  What are we going to do in Syria other than toss some missiles in ineffectively?  Yes, they are killing thousands of their own people.  However, you have the monster Assad on one side and the monsters Al-Qaeda on the other.  For the United States to do anything, other a total invasion in which we must kill the rebels and government forces, is to make a move for a monster.  One that is a dictator willing to gas thousands, and the other a terrorist organization that hit the World Trade Center on 9/11/01 and killed over 3,000 Americans.

We need support neither.  If anything, CIA clandestine operations should be used to spot targets on the ground for Israeli and Turkish bombers...  Pressure should be placed on Russia, Assad's ally in the UN on this matter, to reign his forces in.  Maybe its time for Russia to show the world they actually care more about Syrian civilians more than they care for Assad's business purchasing SAM weapons systems.  At this point, it can be seen that Russia is supporting the monster; like the US with Saddam, they have the obligation to control or remove the monster Assad or his cronies for war crimes.

On another note, with regard to inconvenient statistics...  I know on my side bars I have (or should have) links to the FBI Uniform Crime Reports.  These are very inconvenient for those who support gun control and try to say that Chicago, Los Angles, and Washington DC are safer for having some of the most restrictive laws...  Especially when the rate per 100,000 makes Chicago and DC neck and neck for homicide capitol of the US. However, its harder to see how we compare to Europe and the rest of the world...  Until Harvard did a study: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/08/27/Harvard-Study-Shows-No-Correlation-Between-Strict-Gun-Control-And-Less-Crime-Violence

"...numbers for Eastern European gun ownership and corresponding murder rates, it is readily apparent that less guns to do not mean less death. In Russia, where the rate of gun ownership is 4,000 per 100,000 inhabitants, the murder rate was 20.52 per 100,000 in 2002. That same year in Finland, where the rater of gun ownership is exceedingly higher--39,000 per 100,000--the murder rate was almost nill, at 1.98 per 100,000.
Looking at Western Europe, the study shows that Norway "has far and away Western Europe's highest household gun ownership rate (32%), but also its lowest murder rate." (emphasis mine)
Interesting how that works...  Oh, and about suicides:
"The U.S., which is so often labeled as the most violent nation in the world by gun control proponents, comes in 7th--behind Russia, Estonia, Lativa, Lithuania, Belarus, and the Ukraine--in murders. America also only ranks 22nd in suicides. "
I have an old classmate that attend Ivy League schools who spouts off the same Liberal talking points this report coldly, and concisely, debunks.  Guess one mass shooting (in Norway especially) doesn't make for a violent nation of armed sociopaths after all...  Tragic as they are, they are news because they are so rare, unlike the mafia killings that are rampant in Russia and other eastern European nations (along with terrorist attacks, and yes, government executions of reporters who question Putin).

No comments: