Citação:

Luis Gonzaga
Just follow the money...
Hipotéticos interesses económicos por detrás do conflito sírio (fonte: JN).

Sempre que os EUA se preparam para invadir um país, com o pretexto de armas de destruição massiva, ou, agora, uso de armas químicas, o que está por detrás é sempre, sempre a mesma coisa: interesses económicos.

Luis

Citação:

I've been reading through these comments, and I don't think any of them strike at the truth of the matter. I apologize if this seems blunt. Hereafter I will provide a detailed examination of US interest in Syria.

Realpolitik refers to politics or diplomacy based primarily on power and on practical and material factors and considerations, rather than ideological notions or moral or ethical premises. In this respect, it shares aspects of its philosophical approach with those of realism and pragmatism.

Chemical weapons aren't why the president is interested in Syria. The US has actually been interested in helping the Syrian rebels for a long time. That last link is from the past few days, but they're all connected, which I'll get to.
The US has brought several motions to the UN. Things involving military force, military aid, or war in general are brought to the UN Security Council, a 12 member group consisting of 5 permanent members: US, UK, France, China, and Russia. The permanent members of the council have a special privilege: if any one of them vetoes a motion, it fails automatically. As I said, the US has brought several motions to the UN, which I linked above. All of them have failed, and all of them have failed because Russia (and China) have vetoed them using their veto powers.

So the US has long been interested in helping the Syrian rebels-- why is Russia concerned with vetoing efforts to help them? This is what it's all about: the politics of power. Realpolitik.

Syria, ruled by Bashar al-Assad (who functions basically as a dictator) is Russia's only ally in the Middle East region. The Russians sell a lot of arms to the Syrian government, and importantly the Russian's only naval base in the Mediterranean is based in Tartus, Syria. So, for geostrategic reasons alone, we can see that Russia is interested in keeping the friendly Syrian government in power. Though this isn't the Cold War, Russia is a competitor, so to some extent the US is interested in seeing the Syrian government fall because it would reduce the influence of a competitor in the region.

Another ally of Syria is Iran. You see, al-Assad is an Alawite-- a sect of Shiite Islam. Iran is majority Shiite Islam. The history is too long to recount here, but basically: Islam is divided into two major branches, Sunni and Shiite, which are not friends with each other. Iran and Syria are the only countries in the Middle East with Shiites in power, and Iran is the only country that actually has a majority of its citizens Shiites. It's in Iran's interest to keep the Syrian government in power, as they are the only other Shiite buddy in the region. This, too, is a reason why the US wants the Syrian government to fall; one of our longstanding goals is to remove the Iranian theocracy and prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Removing a friend of Iran reduces their power and influence. Recently to this end of stopping Iran, the US has spent several years encouraging international adoption of economic sanctions against Iran.

Then, there is Israel to consider. Syria borders Israel to its north, and the two have had quite a lot of tension before; during the Six-Day War, Israel occupied the Golan Heights and effectively annexed it, in contravention of international law. The two have not been on good.

Citação:

Luis Gonzaga
Eu compreendo o que dizes, mas então, onde estiveram os EUA nos outros conflitos em África, por exemplo, Ruanda ou Sudão?
Ah, pois... não têm petróleo!

Citação:

Luis Gonzaga
É apenas isso que condeno na atitude norte-americana. Quererem passar a imagem que são os bonzinhos, e que vão salvar os sírios das mãos de um ditador que os mata com armas químicas.
O objectivo dos EUA é mudar o governo na Síria para alguém que lhes seja favorável. Nada tem a ver com o número de mortos. Se o objectivo fosse preservar as vidas humanas, os EUA não teriam fornecido armamento aos rebeldes ao longo dos últimos anos. Tentariam sim, por via diplomática, influenciar o governo sírio.