Image 01 Image 03

If Assad were slaughtering cats, would we be more concerned?

If Assad were slaughtering cats, would we be more concerned?

Jeffrey Goldberg makes several points similar to the points I made in my post last night, The Deal: In order to remove the threat of Bashar Assad, we have to save Bashar Assad.

Goldberg writes, New Syria Agreement Is a Big Victory. For Assad:

A couple of months ago, the Obama administration was — at least rhetorically — targeting Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad for removal. Today, the U.S. has in a perverse way made Assad its partner.

The U.S. and Syria will now be working together on an improbable, even fantastical project: ridding a brutal country at war with itself of chemical weapons.

The agreement, reached over the weekend, to begin disarming Syria represents an astonishing victory for the Assad regime. It is also a victory for Assad’s main weapons supplier and diplomatic protector, Russian President Vladimir Putin….

Which is not to say that this isn’t also a victory — a provisional, morally ambiguous victory — for President Barack Obama as well….

By partnering with Russia and the West on the disarmament process, a process that is meant to last into 2014 (and most likely won’t be finished for years, even if it is carried out in good faith, which is a big “if”), Assad has made himself indispensable.

Goldberg made another point at the end of his article:

Who are the real losers in this episode? That one is easy. The Syrian people. They will continue to be raped, tortured and slaughtered in their homes, in their markets, on their streets, in their hospitals and in their mosques. So long as they die in conventional ways, no one will pay their deaths much mind at all.

Syria FSA Fighter with Cat

That point reminded me of a video I watched last night, particularly this part (at 12:55) where an FSA fighter wonders if Americans would care more about Assad’s slaughter if the victims were cats. In asking for help regardless of the reason, he states with macabre humor:

I hope they will help the cat … Don’t care about the woman, just care about the cat.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



If Queen Elizabeth was found slaughtering cats …

Now, if we got real news, instead of propaganda, we’d have been told that Assad was the head of the Syrian government. And, that he’s following in his dad’s footsteps. Who was the one man who brought calm to the frighting syrians. And, actually installed a working government. Where religious freedoms prevailed.

It’s the saud’s who want the Americans to get rid of Assad. Just as they’re famous for. Since 1935. When we got rid of the Iranian president, and then, installed the Shah.

Just in case you were wondering why we are so hated in the Mideast, we’ve managed so far to bomb about 10 muslim countries. And, the saud’s have been pointing out areas to the American military, including the Basra oil fields in Irak.

Libya’s a mess. We fired into it. And, caused the instability so that Gaddafi got killed. Libya, now is WRECKED. In much worse of a state than when Gaddafi kept things, there, calm.

Why the propaganda?

Before Arik Sharon stroked, he was asked about Assad in Syria. And, he said “what would follow Assad would be worse.” Israel knows it’s stupid to try to take Assad down.

Did the Americans think it would be easy? Nobody gives our military an award for brains. But Assad went to Iran. And, Russia. His survival is now in the cards.

Our military is run by nincompoops.

    “Nobody gives our military an award for brains.”

    Still truly, deeply confused, eh? We are not a military dictatorship. The US military did not make the decisions you deplore.

    Lay of the wacky tabbaccy.

    “Our military is run by nincompoops.”

    It’s not at all clear that the US military is the problem. A more likely suspect is the Commander-in-Chief. He is a civvie, not military. He is also an incompetent flake, and that IS a problem.

    BannedbytheGuardian in reply to Carol Herman. | September 15, 2013 at 7:43 pm

    Gold Standard would both a good civilian leadership & a good military leadership.

    It is also the next chapter in my Fantasy novel.

    For my Disaster novel I can’t go past the current weak civilian and military in America . Has it ever been worse & will there be a morning after & can we hold on thru the night ….do we have a chance to make this right?

    In 2010 wrote to a former friend that I found the Stanley McChrystal episode very disturbing . I said I don’t know why it upsets me but it did . I also said that Petraeus would fail in Afghanistan.

Why Syria? Why now? Also, the “slaughter” was not unprovoked, and it is not unilateral. Since the situation in Syria is not unique, it would suggest that America has a strategic interest in that nation. What is that interest? It is clearly not the use of chemical weapons or an effort to ascertain their source and consumer.

Iraq is unfinished. Afghanistan is unfinished. Yemen is unfinished. Libya is unfinished. Mexico is unfinished. Perhaps we should delegate Syria to Europe. America is clearly overwhelmed with other matters and cannot provide due diligence to yet another campaign.

    n.n in reply to n.n. | September 15, 2013 at 5:55 pm

    If America decides to intervene, especially for humanitarian reasons, then it must be a full commitment, with overwhelming force, to control each party known to engage in the slaughter, and to protect the lives of innocents. It must be preceded with a declaration of war, which will mobilize the nation, its resources, its people, and its morale, to engage, prosecute, and defeat the enemy. The Libya campaign, not to mention the Kosovo campaign, were ineffective efforts to hold all parties accountable for their contribution to the cause and propagation of the conflict. The Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns were prematurely abandoned or relegated in favor of other conflicts. There is an observable trend which, time and again, concludes with failure.

That “Not Anymore…” propaganda film was really well crafted! I was so happy and surprised to see the two stars of the film were so well feed! The clothes, hair, and boots of the FSA terrorists were impeccable, not like anything that I have seen in other videos of them executing Syrian Army captives, or beheading Christians for not converting. And they like cats! Woohoo…

I am always reminded of the high dudgeon many Americans of teh more detached-from-reality variety expressed over the “suicide donkey” employed by one murderous branch of the Palistinians or another against Israeli troops.

Children…??? Meh.

BannedbytheGuardian | September 15, 2013 at 5:04 pm

Perhaps Prof has a vet in the family.

Send them over to help the cats..

When he’s JUGGLING cats, I’ll snap into action!

when both sides are evil, mostly don’t us, and are propagating atrocities upon each other it behooves us to not pick sides.
Those that are pushing for us to use military action should first enlist.

Cats? Women in bags? Sharia law, and anti-Christian Muslims? Not worth the flesh and blood of even one of our American sons.

We are not the world’s police force.

Dunno about cats, but based on their history of spearheading legislation essentially banning horse abbatoirs in this country, the Senate would’ve already passed a resolution DEMANDING boots on the ground if he had been killing horses …

One “viral” video shows a small dog in a human’s palm, and the caption is something like “the way men treat animals tells you much of how they care about people” .. or maybe it was “about what kind of spouse they would make”.

Anyway, I thought it would be cool to make an animated gif where the tiny puppy was changed (after a few seconds where the leftist has time to feel compassion) to a tiny human baby of the same size (which would be about 28 weeks). Are small puppies more valuable than small humans? Does a willingness to abort small humans tell us more than an equal willingness to abort/murder small puppies (or smaller cats)?

Of course puppies and humans and blacks and Mexicans are merely tools for the leftist propaganda machine. The left would joyfully sacrifice a million tea party adults for their totalitarian dream.

Jesse gets rich, while his family sucks up funds from his racist attacks. Jesse’s son and Rev. Wright’s daughter are now paying the price, but the game is still ongoing.

Blogs versus the propaganda of the media. Can they really force people to believe 2+2=5? Does war = peace?

Where did this strange idea that the US has an obligation to bail out anyone who finds himself in deep do-do originate?

The first time it actually happened was probably the Spanish-American War, but that was relatively local; America was acting in a reasonably straightforward and logical way to end a human rights disaster near its own shores. The subsequent involvement in civil problems in the Philippines (and America’s first real involvement with homicidal adherents of Islam, unless one counts the Barbary pirates, though they weren’t homicidal so much as inordinately rapacious) was indirectly caused by the humanitarian intervention in Cuba.

Syria is not terribly local, and dropping a few bombs is perhaps not a convincing way to maintain law and order.

“If Assad were slaughtering cats, would we be more concerned?”

Yes, because I like cats. As it is he’s only killing people, and I’m not fond of people as a general rule.

Obama is the world’s policeman in the same way that Barney Fife was Mayberry’s policeman.

Heh, I tell my criminal justice/substance abuse clients that when the police pull you over sometimes you get Sheriff Andy and sometimes you get Deputy Fife, that it’s best to keep your hands on the wheel and your mouth shut till you see which one you’re dealing with. I bring this up to point out that America’s standing as a world power is only temporarily damaged, the product of Obama’s limp leadership. If the American president is the world’s top police officer, then the Andy/Barney analogy is Reagan/Obama.

“if Americans would care more about Assad’s slaughter”

I care far more about al Qaida’s slaughter, and the guaranteed future slaughter of more and more Christians if the “FSA” makes any more ground.

The professor seems to be sounding quite a bit like our president.

Unlike Arab Muslims, cats don’t kill Americans and Israelis. When they are not trying to slaughter Jews, they’re busy trying to slaughter each other over minor doctrinal disputes about Islam. Let’s also not forget about about the poor Copts. If we are so fired up about killing people why do we ignore their plight?

If we are so concerned about people getting killed in a war, then how about the First and Second Congo wars? By 2008, 5.4 million people died from the direct and indirect effects of the war. The Second Congo war comes in second in death toll after WWII.

Lesson learned: killing people isn’t so bad as long as you don’t use chemical weapons.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to raijin. | September 16, 2013 at 10:21 am

    “Lesson learned: killing people isn’t so bad as long as you don’t use chemical weapons.”

    A hypocrisy exacerbated by the fact that all modern weapons are chemical-based.

Even if it were to save cats, the US should not help a group that is full of terrorists.

You also forget that non-Muslims are relatively safe as long as Assad rules and absolutely not safe if the Rebels win as the terrorists are likely to take over like they did in Egypt and Libya.

Another good reason to stay out is that this will save probably 50 – 100 billions if not more.

Cats didn’t fly planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Muslims did.