[QUOTE="VaguelyTagged"]

honestly, IMO the US should help the rebels out, but only to a point where they can continue the fight without being able to win. this isn't humane obviously but since both sides of the conflict suck, it will keep them busy killing each other for a long time which i think is a good thing.

Jacanuk

You are aware, yes, that the reason that the U.S. hasn't gotten involved thus far to any tangible extent is the problem with who some of the rebels are?

[QUOTE="dude_brahmski"]

ITT: We recall that BranKetra is a mentally challenged individual. Please, be gentle with him.

BranKetra

I could be worse and be a fascist sh!t like you.

One should also be aware of the even graver consequences of intervening, such as completely discrediting the whole concept of the UN and international law. II_Seraphim_II

pbffffftHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA

ITT: We recall that BranKetra is a mentally challenged individual. Please, be gentle with him.

ADblockAckad

[QUOTE="junglist101"]

I wouldn't call government apologists crazy but I would call them delusional. 

LJS9502_basic

Or GameSpot, for that matter.

That was a horribly-written article, the studies didn't mention sh!t about mental illnesses, and "conspiracy theorist" is a pretty useful term.

Fvcking commie savages.

I don't think that would change much.

We bailed out the banks because it would have lead to a much larger financial collapse and economic downturn. Detroit going bankrupt isn't going to have the same impact as the largest financial institutions on the face of the planet going bankrupt. Is it fair? Probably not, but there's your reason. HoolaHoopMan