You do not know one thing about human rights or international law if you're advocating that the U.S. should unilaterally bomb Syria. NOTHING. All you must have read about human rights is in 1984, because you seem to think that WAR = PEACE and BOMBING = PROTECTING CHILDREN. Your exploitation of these dead children to…

But then she put the country into a state of Emergency and stayed in power without votes.

An oversimplification of the Syrian Civil War that assumes what the U.S. gov't is saying about chemical weapons is true (evidence of which the gov't has not released to the U.N., the U.S. Congress, or the U.S. people) is propaganda. This article is also a dehumanization of "The Other," who are held to different…

International human rights norms cannot be enforced by the military of the United States, acting unilaterally. Obama and Bush, war criminals or not, have no business policing the world in this manner.

You certainly do not have to be an expert in international relations to have an educated opinion on what's happening in Syria. This shit is ridiculous and strikes me as pro-war propaganda.

I was. I am very frustrated with political discourse these days.

No on this thread is apologizing for what the U.S. has alleged Assad is doing. NO ONE. If you think pointing out U.S. war crimes = apologizing for Assad's war crimes, than I don't know what to tell you.

Not when it comes to foreign policy.

So you're saying that if Yemen decided to bomb our base where we kept drones, in an effort to enforce international law, you wouldn't consider that an act of war? What planet are you from, MSNBC?

These commenters are sure telling you! When Assad's army kills civilians with chemical weapons, he's an evil murderer, and when Bush's or Obama's army kills civilians with chemical weapons and/or drones, they are just misguided and really the results are just so different: http://www.democracynow.org/2013/3/20/ten_…; …

I said the "U.S. gov't", not "Obama."

No, because the U.S. gov't has used chemical weapons in Iraq and countless people are still suffering for it: http://www.democracynow.org/2013/3/20/ten_…

Best analysis of the Syrian crisis I've read all week. Thanks for the lols Jezebel!

I know it's a losing battle to create a hierarchy of human trauma, but really, the U.S. gov't does not have clean hands and has contributed to countless deaths in the Middle East: http://www.democracynow.org/2013/3/20/ten_…

It's what the Gawker article said, I believe. At any rate, I think he was put on suicide watch but later removed, according to a Google news search I just did, but I have not been closely following this story (because what's the point).

I just don't think you can reach that point of concluding he had "suffered enough" and deserves just 30 days in prison unless you discount the humanity of the victim. I think empathizing with the defendant isn't a bad thing per se, but failing to treat this crime as seriously as the law demands because of your…

It's not that he empathizes with the man who raped the child, it's that he cannot wrap his mind around empathizing with the child who was raped (I think anyway). It's indicative of how exclusive our judges are in this country (too many old, white men).

.

No, he was placed on suicide watch because he was suicidal. People who receive life sentences do not automatically get placed in protective custody/on suicide watch.

No one's comparing you to Ariel Castro. We're talking about a mentally ill person who was put on suicide watch by the OH DOC, and who therefore should have been prevented from taking his own life. The determination by the OH DOC that he was suicidal has nothing to do with you.