According to some here, those people are merely "bogeymen", and less of a threat to the US than "thugs" in Congress.
You got that right. There is nothing the hajis can do that is even comparable to what the fed govt can do (and has already done) to this country.
That's the crux of the problem. An intervention that helps people who may well not deserve to be helped, and who could become a far more hostile and dangerous enemy power than Assad (who was little threat to the west), makes no sense, even if it can be guaranteed to work (which it can't), costs no innocent lives, and does no harm to the west's reputation. Given that the cost in lives and reputation will be considerable, and that there is no conviction it will achieve its desired goals, it seems unwise to get involved. Liberal interventionism makes sense only for clear right vs wrong struggles, where success would be likely at acceptable costs. E.g. former Yugoslavia, Rwanda in the 90s, Libya more recently etc. It is highly amusing that someone like Vladimir Putin is on the more realistic, pro-peace side of things here. The current foreign policy leadership in the west is the most pathetic, incompetent, naive and stupid since the appeasers and isolationists of the 1930s! Thank fuck there is not a serious threat like Hitler or the USSR...at least for now. If China has any brains then they will be looking on with glee, and realising they could pretty much have a free hand in Asia within a few years, if they play their cards right. The likes of Obama, Cameron, Samantha Power, Hollande etc are MASSIVELY increasing the risks of not only a Middle-Easter conflagration, but even future WWIII in the years and decades to come, by their woeful performances.
In truth, congress is a greater threat long term. It's kind of like Jesse and Al are a greater threat to race relations than some punk thug in the street. The thug and al queda, while a more immediate danger exists, can be dealt with and done. Jesse, Al can't congress can't be "removed" as easily.
"It is highly amusing that someone like Vladimir Putin is on the more realistic, pro-peace side of things here" Particularly since he's arming Assad.
We're losing our fundamental freedoms, what does it matter if it's to al qaeda or the US govt? Terrorism is about forcing change through fear, if we change the way we live because of them, then they're winning.
Well then, let's not worry too much about the unintended help al qaeda gets from our overall assistance to Syria's opposition.
what a ridiculous and unpatriotic remark. These very same jihadis mass murdered our people, and they killed several servicemen last year. just because they don't have a fraction of the destructive potential that our fed govt does, does not mean we should help them. Really, just out of principle, we should be stomping out al qaeda all over the globe, including in syria.