Another story of Syria

[dexeron.livejournal.com]

Jon Stewart returned last night, and the talk of the day was, of course, Syria (and he, of course, tried to inject a little humor into the situation.) However, the interview segment with which he closed out the show was anything but humorous, bringing in Andrew Harper, the head of the United Nations Refugee Agency in Jordan. This is the important story, in my opinion: the story of millions of people displaced from their homes, many of them women and children. It's also the story of nations such as Jordan who are doing what they can to provide a safe haven for some of these people, and the incredible work being done by the UN, an organization that is so often derided by folks here in the U.S., but which does certain things very well; this is one of them.

Any discussion of our response to the situation in Syria should involve the discussion of how we can help these people. While we're talking about what message we should send to the Assad regime, or whether or not we should act militarily, and in which way, here is an obvious human crisis where we could all put our money where our mouths are. I'd prefer to see this story given the lion's share of airtime on our cable news stations, over constant redundant talking heads debating back and forth on questions of chemical weapons and factions and military responses and political calculus.

Here's the interview, in two parts:

If the embedding doesn't work for some reason, here are direct links:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-september-3-2013/exclusive---andrew-harper-extended-interview-pt--1

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-september-3-2013/exclusive---andrew-harper-extended-interview-pt--2

Comments

[dexeron.livejournal.com]

Even the Goldstone report specifically states that the use of WP is not illegal under international law (this was in the original report). It simply isn't. Literally, it states that WP used for smoke screens is not prohibited.

And again, you're dodging. We're not trying to claim it is illegal. We're saying that it was used in a careless manner that lead to civilian deaths.


These are airburst munitions designed and built in the US to create smoke, not kill people.

Oh, well they're not DESIGNED to kill people. I guess a wizard did it, or something.


You want to give me some causality figures, some collateral damage figures, go for it. They don't really exist, of course.

Links have already been provided to you. You are choosing to dismiss them, because you're stuck on this strawman about arguing whether or not it is a "weapon", which isn't the point. Your argument is the rhetorical equivalent of me saying: "smoking has been linked to cancer" and you answering: "But tomatoes aren't a vegitable!" What you're saying might be true, but it's not answering the contention being made.

[cheezyfish.livejournal.com]

And again, you're dodging. We're not trying to claim it is illegal. We're saying that it was used in a careless manner that lead to civilian deaths.

Define a "careless manner." While your at it, tell us what a careful manner would be with using WP smoke munitions over civilian populations.

Oh, well they're not DESIGNED to kill people. I guess a wizard did it, or something.

I'm still waiting on those causality reports.

Links have already been provided to you.

Don't embarrass yourself. Those links provide no information on the overall damage caused by the WP smoke munitions.