Harassing Geese or Saving Syrians?

I was saddened to read that the task of "harassing geese" - and yes, "harass" in the sense of to make noise, annoy in some way, to have a loose dog, to clank pots and pans, etc. - is a recognized profession.

Apparently a small town has a number (50 to 70) of non-migrating (resident) geese which are nuisance.

One can only imagine the EPA red tape involved in such a difficult decision and profession: "Since the geese are federally protected birds ... you have to be careful what you do in harming any..."

There are lots of nuisance animals, such as black bears which I wrote about a few weeks ago, present in cities and populated areas.

Of course, at least black bears are governed by local hunting regulations, so, like the geese, they cannot be eliminated even if they become a problem or danger.  (Geese can be dangerous in close quarters and are also a significant danger to aircraft.)

Now you have to wonder, given our country's fiscal state if spending a lot of money on regulating the business of "goose harassment" is a good "investment."

For example, I wrote about Syria recently and there's a lot more interesting going on there were the same funds might do humanity more overall good.

For example, the Assad has a significant investment in chemical weapons which he is working on expanding.

Here the problem is that the "Syrian rebel's" have discovered, according to CNN, of these installations.

Like most second rate terrorist states Syria has to use technology far less capable than nuclear weapons - for example, a common, easily-made staple for terror is sarin gas.

Sarin, is made with isopropyl alcohol and DF (Methylphosphonyl difluoride).  Sarin is itself unstable and degrades over a period of weeks so its typically stored in "binary form."

"Binary form" means that the weapon is stored as two parts which do no degrade on their own and, when needed, the parts are mixed to activate the weapon.

In the case of the CNN story the Syrian rebels have discovered sites with these binary forms.

The larger problem here is that Syria initially intended to use these weapons internally but, back in July, sufficient pressure (I suppose there was a break in policing goose harassment) was put on the regime to stop it.

(There is also the question of what exactly Iran is supplying Syria with its "shipments.")

Today Syria claims it will only use these weapons on "external agressors."  (Pulling back from threatening to use it on the "rebels.")

How nice.

Yet this stuff is laying around in numerous locations in the country easily accessible to "rebels."

A guy I know, let's call him "Frank" spent some time explaining "Syria" to me.  Born there he had left about ten or fifteen years ago along with his other family.  Only his sister remained.

He had access to a number of current YouTube videos showing the violence.

It was quite disturbing.

He described genesis of the current violence as various sects of Islam diametrically opposed to each other - nothing new for that region - but for whatever reason had boiled over to affect the government and the people.

Like most middle eastern people I know here in the US he was thankful to be here though greatly concerned for the life and safety of the family left behind.

Of course he viewed the US as a tremendous potential ally to the "Syrian" people.

But, like me, was puzzled by the notion and importance of things like EPA regulated "goose harassment" when literally tens of thousands of his countrymen were dying.

Unlike the Syrian rebels at least geese are harassed on a "regular schedule" - at least according to this site.

I also have to ask myself if I am better off with a few dead geese lying around a lake where no doubt local wildlife or hunters will quickly consume and dispose of them than a large collection of Syrian rebels with unknown intentions wielding sarin gas rockets, mortars and missiles.

Perhaps the Syrian people should claim themselves to be Canadian geese from the US?