False Flags and Inappropriate Actions: Syrian Conflict

 I've always considered the libertarian ideology to be one of pragmatism. It's my personal view that the best way forward is the path that is the most logical and the most practical. To illustrate my point, let's talk practicality first, and false flags second.

1. Costs

Aside from the fact that it would cost us hundreds of millions of dollars just to drop one or two bombs anywhere in the world, money which we DO NOT HAVE, we and the syrian people would also pay the cost of human lives, something much more important. I find it frighteningly frustrating that our president touts the importance of saving lives, while talking about killing thousands of people in the process of our heroism. Violence does not stop violence - simple as that.

2. Safety

It seems to me that these talks of "saving our troops" and so many peoples lives, is a sad pretext to just about every violent conflict we get involved in. Aside from vehemently believing in Benjamin Franklin's wise words about not putting safety before liberty, I also feel we put ourselves at a much greater risk every time we attempt to be international "peace keepers". And it's not that I believe we should be cowards and protect only ourselves or never step in and help out, if we hadn't done that in WWI or WWII, the world would most likely not be here right now. That being said, look at almost every other conflict we've gotten involved in. Syria in particular is a great example of the kinds of trouble we can stir up in these situations. By getting involved in the Syrian civil war, we would not only be picking a fight with the Syrian nation, but we would be putting several other much more powerful countries up in arms against our "heroic" efforts. This is not something we need, especially now with all of our troops spread out across the world.

3. Reasons

Our government claims we would be saving the lives of adults and children, after we bomb the hell out of them. Our government claims we would be preventing the use of toxic gases, that we ourselves are using through Monsanto every day. They say we would be showing how tough we are on this kind of terrorism, and that we would be showing the world that there are just some things you don't do. But what about the force female circumcisions going on in African countries? What about the forced poverty of First Nation peoples in our own country? Or the fact that we have three unowned and empty homes for every 1 homeless person in our own country. What about the fact that our government has been arming Syria for the past decade and more? What about the blood being spilled in Thailand? What about the indigenous people who are being forced out of their natural homes in Brazil? When and where is it that we suddenly draw the line? There were people being gassed by Saddam for years and we did nothing. There are people all over the world who are being put through horrible terrors in nations that we are allies with. Why is it that now we "must" take a stand? Why is it that suddenly Syria is on our radar, when they have been fighting and spilling blood for over a decade? The reasons they say we should declare war on their actions, just don't make any logical sense when you view them in contrast to everything else we have ignored and are STILL ignoring.

4. History

In the whole of history of creating more violence to prevent violence, I cannot find a single time when it actually worked out for all parties involved. Our recent interference with the Iraq and Iran wars put us trillions of dollars in debt, threw the worlds economy into the toilet and continues to kill people every day - many of whom are our own. Even in the few wars we've been in that did take out ruthless dictators who were truly a threat to the rest of the world, the people suffered most. The rich got richer, the poor got poorer, more people died unnecessarily and our evolution was stunted in more ways than can be counted.

5. Support

Every poll that has been taken since August 21st when the gassing occurred, showed that the people of American, and indeed, most other nations who are apparently important enough to have a say, have agreed that going to war with Syria is not in anyone's best interest.

6. Intel

We don't even know whether it was the Syrian government or the Syrian rebels who initiated the gassing of all those people. For that matter, we don't know that it wasn't a set up from a completely unexpected group of evil doers who might have some ulterior motive to kick start another global war, or drain our military resources or any other number of thousands of motives behind what happened. No one likes what happened, it was inhumane and absolutely wrong, but without knowing who actually did what, how are we going to know who to punish and who to help? If we go in with crappy intel and a hard on for trigger pulling, whose to say we don't drop the load on the wrong people and lead the way for even more gassing, death and wrong doing?

7. The Plan

It is very difficult to not be skeptical any time our government suggests taking major actions like putting thousands of soldiers on the ground or bombings, when it's easily considerable that we could send in special ops groups, trained in quick and discreet removal of tyrants. Even with all the weapons and systems that Russia and Iran have armed Syria with, they are not even comparable with the training of the few elite soldiers in our hands who could easily go in, discover the true initiators of the gassing and discreetly take them out with nothing more than a few small tools. Those resources would cost us about a third of the cost that even a single bomb would. That isn't to say that I believe we should be involved in any conflict that isn't our own, but if we were to be involved, there are much more practical, efficient and safe ways to do so.

Total False Flag

If that logic isn't enough to show why we should not be playing world police with Syria or any other nation outside of our own, think about the ways in which this proposition of war has occurred, and how it makes sense that this is yet another false flag with the aim of conquering yet another country for their resources and putting political means before the needs of human beings.

I was already weary and skeptical of our involvement at the beginning of the heightened media attention to the Syrian conflicts in August, but once our very own president started to connect the Boston Bombing incident with the gassing incident in Syria, it became very clear that just about everything that has been allowed to be heard and seen, has been yet another piece of the overall political puzzle.

For those of you who haven't yet noticed, just about every unofficial and official conflict our government has involved us in over the past 30 years, has been connected to a major plan by the Israeli government to disarm and disconnect the larger more threatening nations that oppose them and pose any sort of threat to the world oligarchy revealing itself. Just look at what happens once we have "won" each conflict. Resources in the conquered nations are divided, including oil, gold and food, and then we find a way to maintain our stay in those countries long term. Sure, it may seem like a giant conspiracy theory now, but so do many plots that are not officially uncovered until decades down the road.

Aside from the fact that we have no business being involved in any of the overseas conflicts we're involved in, especially after going into Iran to find they had NONE of the WMD we were told they did, as a libertarian, I firmly believe that we should not be involved in any conflicts that do not take place directly on our soil. I also believe that the need should be greater than the risks. Even the 9/11 event that killed less people than the flu kills in 6 months, should have been set aside, as the risks to our soldiers, economy and resources, were not worth our vengence.

Though at this point, it seems that our dear president has little concern for our safety, needs or wants. He may be saying that he wants to "do it right" this time by going through congress, but it's very clear that he really doesn't care what we our congress wants unless we agree with him. And as with most politicians before him, since this is his last allowable term in office, there is no reason for him to pander to voters in hopes of getting another term.

As my mother tells me, I use too much logic, and the world tends to be disagreeable to that sort of thing. Talking about minding our own business and working on our own problems before we try to work on others troubles, is just plain silly.