Why was the use of chemical weapons in Syria the 'red line'?
Asked by
bookish1 (
13159
)
June 14th, 2013
The Obama administration announced yesterday that it has proof that the government of Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons in Syria, killing between 100 and 150 people. But the civilian death toll for the civil war since its beginning is close to 100,000 and probably higher.
An average of 5,000 Syrians are dying per month in the conflict, which is worse violence in terms of numbers than Iraq in the depths of its sectarian civil war during its American occupation.
Why was the use of chemical weapons declared to be a red line? Do you trust the American government’s declaration after the false pretext we offered for invading Iraq?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
8 Answers
Great question.
I think it’s a manifestation of our struggle to believe that war can be honorable. In the face of the horror of mass slaughter, we see our own savagery and fear the loss of our humanity. Setting boundaries, even somewhat arbitrary ones, makes us feel that we haven’t entirely abandoned our humanity. Defining what lies on the other side of “the line” as evil makes us feel better about what we do on this side of the line.
^^^Very good. That and the main arbiter of good taste in warfare, the Geneva Convention, forbids it.
Yes, I trust President Obama and this administration much more than the Bushies. The use of chemical weapons was the red line for intervening in a civil conflict and violating the sanctity of borders because it is a violation of the Geneva Conventions and the laws of normal human decency.
It is well intended as chemical weapons are horrible but it is hypocritical coming from the country that used Agent Orange and napalm in Vietnam and some nameless chemical that is causing huge numbers of birth defects in Fallujah.
The ‘red line’ that has been crossed is that Assad is starting to win.
Actually the geneva convention does not ban the use of chemical weapons by a state against its own people in a civil conflict. That’s why your government can dump teargas as on you.
Because Obama had said it was and the War Hawks would not let the dumbass forget it.
Because chemical weapons can be used as WMDs and conventional ones can’t. The issue is about the potential, not about counting the current numbers of victims.
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
