Reddit reviews War Crimes in Vietnam

I have strong doubt about military action in Syria but Putin's reasoning is fallacious. The argument is: it would be "utter nonsense" for the Syrian Government to use chemical weapons when it was winning its war with rebels...

One empirical example would be the account of the end of WWII in the Pacific given in the documentary - The Fog of War: The Life of Robert McNamara: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/fog_of_war/

The US had gained the upper hand on Japan through firebombing of their wooden cities. However Japan wasn't surrendering.

[Digressing - In the book War Crimes in Vietnam there is evidence that Japan sued for peace through back channels months before the US dropped the A bomb] http://www.amazon.com/War-Crimes-Vietnam-Bertrand-Russell/dp/0853450587

The dropping of two atomic bombs facilitated an unconditional surrender without having to invade the island like we have been doing throughout the Pacific Campaign

In other words, we were winning but we used the Atomic Bomb, this is an real example of Putin's reasoning being false. One side of a conflict may escalate even if they are winning because they believe there is some advantage in doing so.

So suck this Putin 8--> o:

Remember American bombs kill children too and there are consequences for that. This is a rock and a hard place decision about military intervention in Syria and I think Obama may be very wrong.