I watched some interviews last night, and this one guy made sense to me. He says that statistics can prove that where we had X number of terrorists before the bombings started we now have 100X terrorists. For each innocent child that dies, terrorists are multiplied by a factor. He recommended (I was totally surprised that this has not already been done) to immediately close the border between Turkey and Syria so that armaments and most importantly terrorists can't get over the border to Syria. Also that no bombing could EVER stand a chance if there is not some part of including the current regime - meaning Assad. He may have a proven record of killing, but so do all of those countries doing the bombings as well. They may say they won't target innocents, but then terrorists are notorious for using human shields to hide behind, and also exploiting their deaths for getting mileage for their cause in the media.
If one really starts to think about it, it's really a lose lose scenario, except for the armaments companies. And one also needs to ask. Who's going to pay for all of it? Or is this a great way for countries like the UK, France, Russia to get their economies going with increasing a massive demand for armaments?
I'm cynical. VERY cynical and completely distrustful of what is happening. Nice words that are being used by the politicians, but not so sure how meaningful it's going to be. UK has gone into Iraq before and it's had really bad ramifications. Why should it be better now?
