Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    12:51 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: We have proof this time of Chemical Weapons being used! Back to Topics
btc1

Champion Author
Lexington

Posts:23,254
Points:894,035
Joined:Aug 2006
Message Posted: Aug 31, 2013 8:38:52 AM

So why this time is there less support to provide just air strikes to disable the ability to use these chemical weapons against Children, Women and Men who are innocent to the idea of war?

Why will the public not support this. The latest polling shows a 50/50 split. What is the problem here? We need to nail this SOB to the wall!
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,586
Points:3,489,445
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Sep 20, 2013 11:45:22 PM

Jemac said: "When there's two people in a locked room and one's dead from a bullet wound and the gun's near the live person, there is no "proof" that the live person killed the deadman either."

--Hmmm.. Schroedinger's box? Well, sort of..

Btc1 - I think it's not proven that Assad and the regime are totally at fault, though I think some evidence proves it. It is by far NOT for certain that the rebels DIDN'T use chem weapons (or in other words, there are some questions as to whether they did or not. IT is possible that the rebels did use chem shells.

Also, what say you about the possibility that Hezbollah will take over if Assad falls? How would you like that possibility? How would your in-laws like it?
Profile Pic
btc1
Champion Author Lexington

Posts:23,254
Points:894,035
Joined:Aug 2006
Message Posted: Sep 20, 2013 7:29:01 PM

Thank you, Putin. Yeah, let's believe him...

The ones used were only available to Assad and that military. There is the proof. Nowhere else.
Profile Pic
citizen1
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:1,842
Points:1,016,970
Joined:Apr 2004
Message Posted: Sep 20, 2013 11:44:17 AM

The rebels are the only one proven to use chemical weapons.
Profile Pic
Jemac
Champion Author Florida

Posts:27,308
Points:3,905,405
Joined:Mar 2004
Message Posted: Sep 20, 2013 10:41:09 AM

When there's two people in a locked room and one's dead from a bullet wound and the gun's near the live person, there is no "proof" that the live person killed the deadman either.

Lets be sensible here, the rockets came from Assad's positions, controlled by Assad's people. The rockets used could not be brought in by the rebels, then quickly disassembled, etc, etc.

Both parties suck and Assad's no better or worse than El Qaeda liver eating people. Take both scums out and leave the real liberty freedom loving people alone!
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:5,594
Points:1,544,570
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2013 9:29:54 AM

There is proof that Chem weapons were used.
There is NO Proof of which side used them.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,586
Points:3,489,445
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 11:25:54 PM

Passer said in his imbalanced response: "To oversimplify, (I most do this because the GOP either can't or won't understand) the policy is to tell the world that the use of Chemical weapons, even in war, is unacceptable."

--OK, then I take it that in your objection to chem weapons, you must, therefore have supported George W. Bush's adventure into Iraq. After all, Saddam was KNOWN (proof that is absolutely IRREFUTABLE) to have used chem and bio weapons on the Kurds, on the S. Iraqi Marsh Arabs AND against Iran in their 10 year border war.

Now, if you would then say: "but.. but.. none were actually found.." Well, yes and no. They did find shells buried along the Tigris that had traces of chem agents, so they were filled at one time. They also found that mobile lab for making bio agents, such as anthrax. The actual weapons themselves, according to Saddam's #3 military man, Maj Gen Georges Sada (Chief of their Air Force) were shipped to Syria for hiding. And I suspect they will be discovered and turned over there.

Passer also said: "I75- Did you bother reading what I was responding to? Please read the above if you glanced over it because it was written by a Republican. He wanted to take away my right to criticize Republicans because he was and Republicans especially on the Right are very uncomfortable about criticizing them. They just want to confine all debate to Obama perceived faults."

--Uhhh.. Passer. You are absolutely wrong.. once again. I'm actually an independent (it's called "decline to state party affiliation" in the California vernacular). But the party that most closely matches my worldview is actually the Libertarians. Catch their act at WWW.LP.ORG. Now, you want to talk about Republican faults? Their biggest one is lack of fiscal discipline. I absolutely agree. However, the Democrat party has been far, far WORSE! With deficits piling up, and overspending on social programs we can't afford, Obama piled up more debt in 2-3 years than Bush did in 8. Does that make Bush a "good guy"? Hell no. But there is a certain criticism there, and in proportion, Obama has been worse for our country, not better - fiscally speaking.

Now, let's get back to chem weapons for a sec. Passer, you and our Lib Dem friends have excoriated Bush for going into Iraq over chem weapons. Admittedly, he didn't have much of a plan, and he claimed it wasn't about nation building, though it ended up being just such an exercise.

Now Obama wants to do the same bloody thing. He wants some kind of strike against Syria. Some fool strike at some part of Assad's army or regime won't do "squat"? What is he going to do? Send Tomahawk Cruise Missiles to strike a set of empty tents for empty buildings like another president before him did? Again, the parallels here are pretty obvious. For you to flagellate Bush, yet not even have the "huevos" to question Obama's plan, or, rather, lack thereof, speaks of terrible hypocrisy. So, then..Mr. "Pot", meet Mrs. "Kettle"....

[Edited by: AC-302 at 9/17/2013 11:26:47 PM EST]
Profile Pic
jeskibuff
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:10,790
Points:2,078,305
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 9:13:42 PM

Passer said: "The days of GOP winning elections based on Swiftboating falsehoods and lies are over forever!"

WRONG on several counts...

1) The Swiftboat vets were men of integrity. John Kerry was the man lacking integrity. There was too much evidence that backed up their story and too many incidents of Kerry speaking out of both sides of his mouth - like throwing his medals over a fence but somehow still keeping them. To call the Swiftboat vets liars and Kerry a "man of integrity" is basically a lie coming out of YOUR mouth!

2) Kerry lost not because of lies and falsehoods told against him, but the evidence that showed he was a liar and a manipulator. He was caught talking out of both sides of his mouth in his campaign on several occasions, one notably where he told a group of NYC Jews that the Israel wall was essential for their defense, then telling a group of Arabs that the wall was an atrocity.

So, you lose once again in your attempt to debase the Swiftboat vets. They should receive the highest praise for helping to keep such a con artist from reaching the White House.
Profile Pic
NothingNew
Rookie Author Rockford

Posts:77
Points:1,080
Joined:Aug 2013
Message Posted: Sep 17, 2013 9:11:09 PM

Kerry said there was "positive proof" of missiles being used.

The UN inspectors (who were actually there" said the shells came from artillery (big GUNS for those of you who do not speak military).

Now, obviously, one of those is wrong.

As I stated before, what mental derangement would eliminate Al Qaeda as equally suspect? The people who blow up Mosques full of women and children, blow up marketplaces full of women and children, blow up schools full of children, shoot little girls for standing up to these "big brave men"? These people would not use CBW methods? Are you deluded or what?

After Bush and Cheney attacked Iraq for no good reason, the fanatics in the Middle East went nuts. Saddam was their enemy too, but he was their problem, NOT OURS!! They used our attack as a means to recruit new members. Our attack helped Al Qaeda. Get it?

They want us to attack another "sovereign Muslim nation" as a way to recruit new fanatics to their cause. Assad, on the other hand, risked an attack by the U.S. if he used CBW means.

Al Qaeda wins by using CBW, Assad risks losing by using CBW. But Al Qaeda is not equally suspect?

What are you smoking, and where can I get some?
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:74,225
Points:3,084,095
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Sep 16, 2013 11:23:57 AM

Passer, there is a thread about the problems in the Republican party. I have posted there.
Basically the "old guard" such as Mitch McConnell can go take a hike, maybe on the Appalachian Trail or someplace.
The fresh blood has the better ideas.
Rand Paul finds himself in the uncomfortable spot of not being "politically" able to criticize McConnell even though the elder Senator did not suppor the younger Paul in his primary campaign.

The infighting in the Republican Party might seem amusing to some.
It is not to those who want to see a vibrant conservative party in this country.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,066
Points:1,916,895
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 16, 2013 11:05:40 AM

Passer: "We should go in gungho and gun ho and support the Rebels and topple Assad?"


I'm simply noting how skilled our dear leader and his donkey Kerry are at negotiating dear leader's "redline" position. I guess that line wasn't really red at a all, but perhaps more like a shade of yellow.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
Passer
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:19,641
Points:2,339,490
Joined:Jan 2004
Message Posted: Sep 16, 2013 9:38:12 AM

"Passer - when you actually have a useful idea to share, rather than yet another criticism of the Republicans, please come back and share it with us."

I75- Did you bother reading what I was responding to? Please read the above if you glanced over it because it was written by a Republican. He wanted to take away my right to criticize Republicans because he was and Republicans especially on the Right are very uncomfortable about criticizing them. They just want to confine all debate to Obama perceived faults.

"Sorry Passer, just because I might admit to being a registered Republican does not mean that I or any other person, whether a registered Republican or not, has given up any right to criticize the 0bama Administration for any reason"

Of course!

But tell your GOP friends that that works BOTH ways. And if a post starts with "stop another criticism of Republicans..."

you can bet that is an incentive to bring up the huge list of why those Holier than Thou fanatics are not so holy (except in their arguments).

The days of GOP winning elections based on Swiftboating falsehoods and lies are over forever!

My opinions, as much as yours ARE "useful" in spite of the usual GOP attempts at censorship at anything they feel uncomfortable with!









[Edited by: Passer at 9/16/2013 9:42:45 AM EST]
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:74,225
Points:3,084,095
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Sep 16, 2013 8:21:47 AM

Passer wrote: "So the GOP is again talking out of many mouths and lost any right to criticize Obama because the "party" doesn't have a unified position and are telling the public the exact opposite of each other."

Sorry Passer, just because I might admit to being a registered Republican does not mean that I or any other person, whether a registered Republican or not, has given up any right to criticize the 0bama Administration for any reason. There are plenty of angles to criticize 0bama on, I'll choose the ones that make me feel all warm and fuzzy. Just because there are different schools of thought in the Republican Party does not mean that they have given up any rights either, or that the party cannot speak at all if it does not speak with one voice.

Heck, I'll even refer to this Hillary classic on the subject.

[Edited by: I75at7AM at 9/16/2013 8:22:18 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Passer
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:19,641
Points:2,339,490
Joined:Jan 2004
Message Posted: Sep 16, 2013 1:47:38 AM

Does it matter? Does it matter to you if only six million Jews die in Germany tomorrow? Is it worth our tax money or the blood of our children?

It will only waste our resources and create more useless casualties in an effort for our useless President to try to make himself look stronger.


Does history repeat itself? Are you talking about Obama or Roosevelt or both?
Profile Pic
Passer
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:19,641
Points:2,339,490
Joined:Jan 2004
Message Posted: Sep 16, 2013 1:04:45 AM

"From what I've read about the "deal", there is no provision to attack Syria even if Assad breaks it. Nice negotiating Kerry & Obama. Can I sell either of you a used car sometime? Please???"

So you are of the McCain Wing of the GOP, mudtoe?

We should go in gungho and gun ho and support the Rebels and topple Assad?
Profile Pic
mnrick041
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:17,804
Points:2,019,225
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Sep 15, 2013 8:51:41 PM

Does it matter? Does it matter to you if everyone in Syria dies tomorrow? Is it worth our tax money or the blood of our children?

It will only waste our resources and create more useless casualties in an effort for our useless President to try to make himself look stronger.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,066
Points:1,916,895
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 15, 2013 8:17:07 PM

From what I've read about the "deal", there is no provision to attack Syria even if Assad breaks it. Nice negotiating Kerry & Obama. Can I sell either of you a used car sometime? Please???


mudtoe
Profile Pic
btc1
Champion Author Lexington

Posts:23,254
Points:894,035
Joined:Aug 2006
Message Posted: Sep 15, 2013 8:13:48 PM

Assad has now admitted he used them.
Profile Pic
Passer
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:19,641
Points:2,339,490
Joined:Jan 2004
Message Posted: Sep 15, 2013 7:24:19 PM

typo: "most" should be "must", obviously
Profile Pic
Passer
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:19,641
Points:2,339,490
Joined:Jan 2004
Message Posted: Sep 15, 2013 7:09:50 PM

"Passer - when you actually have a useful idea to share, rather than yet another criticism of the Republicans, please come back and share it with us."

Wow, that's the perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black, ac-302. It's the GOP constantly criticizing not only Obama but each other. Obviously, being out of power so long, and the GOP has forgotten how to govern and do any and everything but criticize.

You don't have to agree with Obama's policy but don't show the GOP's purposeful, self inflicted ignorance to understand it:

To oversimplify, (I most do this because the GOP either can't or won't understand) the policy is to tell the world that the use of Chemical weapons, even in war, is unacceptable. If used the United States has the right to attack the transgressor. That threat of the use of force has produced for the first time, real progress on the issue and may have the result of having a country that didn't even admit to having those weapons, agree to not only stop their use, but to get rid of them. A good message to Iran.

The Syrian Civil War is another completely seperate issue that Obama is not focusing on because of the fact, that the opposition does have elements of terrorists, themselves within it. Now John McCain, minimizes this and thinks we should get involved on the opposition's side and go all out to topple the Syrian government. Republican Rand Paul says the opposite, ie don't get involved at all, do nothing.

So the GOP is again talking out of many mouths and lost any right to criticize Obama because the "party" doesn't have a unified position and are telling the public the exact opposite of each other. Paul says one thing, McCain the opposite and YOU, 302 hypocritically criticize Obama because its the easier and more cowardly thing to do because you are afraid to acknowledge the GOP "position". What is it? Is it McCain, or is it Paul's.

Can't decide, so criticize Obama? Real brave. Takes a lot of GOP courage to do that, doesn't it?

No matter what "position" you take you'll have a pick of Republicans to back you. That's GOP Leadership: failing to take a position and just rely on good old criticism of someone who has the Responsibility. No wonder that the GOP nationally are still a bunch of losers.



[Edited by: Passer at 9/15/2013 7:12:55 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:24,239
Points:3,816,640
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 15, 2013 8:34:40 AM

"Why will the public not support this."

We have trust issues.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:24,239
Points:3,816,640
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 15, 2013 8:32:23 AM

On 8/31 btc1 said, "The latest polling shows a 50/50 split."

Last week Reuters/Ipsos pollsters found 35 percent of Americans said they were satisfied with how Obama had handled the (Syria) situation, while 65 percent were dissatisfied.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,586
Points:3,489,445
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Sep 15, 2013 1:04:30 AM

Passer - when you actually have a useful idea to share, rather than yet another criticism of the Republicans, please come back and share it with us. What? All "tapped out" for ideas? I though so.

Meanwhile, btc1 said: "Like the Pres. said last night, AC, it would set a precedent to be taken advantage of by other rogue countries. AND, it would alert Iran to a weakness of our standing in the world. THAT cannot happen. When we say we will defend red lines set by world orders then we must do it!"

--Well, as to that precedent, I'd say that he's already set it four previous times. And he does look like a buffoon on the world stage. He particularly looks bad in the Arab world. Force is the language that is understood there, and he is impotent in his use of it.

I agree with Mudtoe and I75. What is the end game? What is the goal? Is there a strategy, or is this going to be some kind of pinprick strike, and if so, against whom? And would it be wise to hit Assad hard enough to cripple or topple his administration? When he's toppled, who will supplant him? Will it be other radical Islamists backed by Iran and Hezbollah? (that seems the likely outcome)

I say again - what is the end game? Other than for Obama to make a "face saving" gesture, what is "the plan"? What will the measure of victory be in Syria? These things have to be thought out pretty carefully. If Obama has this in mind, he "sure as Shineola" hasn't made that obvious to the American people that he's trying to convince.
Profile Pic
Passer
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:19,641
Points:2,339,490
Joined:Jan 2004
Message Posted: Sep 13, 2013 9:44:53 PM

"And neither woman is currently a candidate for any office."

Did Palin QUIT (again,again) her bid to be REPUBLICAN Senator from Alaska?

She has said Alaska's Begich is no good and needs to be replaced and obviously, she "thinks" she would be bitter er better and that she would be quit er quite the better person to resent er represent the Great State of Alaska. When did she quit this idea?
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:74,225
Points:3,084,095
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Sep 12, 2013 8:47:31 AM


>>I don't know which Republican candidate is a bigger joke...Palin or Bachmann<<

????

Wrong topic, worryfree.

And neither woman is currently a candidate for any office.

Personally, I would take Bachmann/Palin over 0bama/Biden any day, any week, any year, any time.
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,794
Points:3,180,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 12, 2013 1:20:52 AM


EZExit - great link. Thanks!

Profile Pic
worryfree
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:27,417
Points:2,454,055
Joined:Oct 2005
Message Posted: Sep 12, 2013 1:11:41 AM

I don't know which Republican candidate is a bigger joke...Palin or Bachmann
Profile Pic
Passer
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:19,641
Points:2,339,490
Joined:Jan 2004
Message Posted: Sep 12, 2013 1:04:52 AM

"Based on her record of accomplishments, Palin would have been a much better choice as PRESIDENT..."

Really? Her "accomplishments"? You call me "partisan" when you have to rupture reality even to use the word "accomplishments" when her greatest "accomplishment" has been (and she IS a has-been) to be a quitter. Is that what the current GOP has been reduced to -- having to extoll the imaginary "accomplishments" of the greatest National Quitter of our time?

Surely you jest, Jest!




[Edited by: Passer at 9/12/2013 1:07:52 AM EST]
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:16,336
Points:2,359,735
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Sep 11, 2013 10:34:22 PM

I received an email from a democratic operative, with a link to a grass roots video...

Help Kickstart World War III!

I hope they won't hold their breath too long waiting for a donation from me.
Profile Pic
jeskibuff
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:10,790
Points:2,078,305
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 11, 2013 6:16:59 PM

Passer said: >The GOP "speaks" with almost as many voices<

Hmmmm...you liberals need to get YOUR criticism down a little more pat.

Yes, there are varied opinions within the GOP membership...there are many opinions held by the bunch.

Of course, you'll be the first to criticize them when those voices sometimes speak in unison...you'll accuse them of "walking in lockstep", won't you?

You really can't have it both ways. You need to make up your mind, 'cause the way it is now somewhat totally depletes your credibility.
Profile Pic
jeskibuff
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:10,790
Points:2,078,305
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 11, 2013 6:11:12 PM

Passer said: "Nominating Palin was the absolute proof. She WAS the best Democratic nominee ever for a position at that level."

You know, your attempts at covering for the stupidity of your Anointed One by trying to make people believe that Palin is the dumb one just don't work too well anymore.

Based on her record of accomplishments, Palin would have been a much better choice as PRESIDENT over Obozo whose "accomplishments" have only set the country backwards in terms of positive progress. Since she was so much better than Obozo, she would have been overqualified for the V.P. position compared to Biden.

Your partisan bias shows all too well in your willingness to ridicule Palin while not even attempting to address the myriad of failures and gaffes your idiot team of Obozo & Biden are responsible for.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:22,353
Points:325,605
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Sep 11, 2013 6:11:01 PM

Your original sentence was funnier, and more accurate.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,066
Points:1,916,895
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 11, 2013 5:46:22 PM

Passer: "What is YOUR position of what Obama SHOULD have done...."


I can tell you a couple right off the bat.


1). I wouldn't have made my first international act as President a world tour apologizing for America and it's power, which had just been entrusted to me. That tour sowed the seeds of what we are reaping now.

2). I would never have issued an ultimatum backed by American military power as a campaign prop.

3). If I were dumb enough to have issued an ultimatum backed by American military power as a campaign prop, and I were called on it, I would have made good on my threat without discussion or delay the moment I was called on it.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
Passer
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:19,641
Points:2,339,490
Joined:Jan 2004
Message Posted: Sep 11, 2013 5:18:33 PM

Typo, sentence should have read:

The GOP "speaks" with almost as many voices as your last can'tidate had faces and 15 minute positions which would change by the quarter hour.
Profile Pic
Passer
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:19,641
Points:2,339,490
Joined:Jan 2004
Message Posted: Sep 11, 2013 4:37:41 PM

Mudtoe,

Exactly what should Obama have done of which you would have approved. I realize that the GOP hasn't had the "Responsibility of Leadership" for almost a decade and all that they can presently do is criticize and argue among themselves. Paul retreats one way and McCain aggressively wants the opposite. The GOP "speaks" with almost as many voices and your last can'tidate had faces and 10 minute positions which would change by the quarter hour.

If you are afraid of doing anything but criticize, that is understandable because you seem to be a Republican who will criticize based on Ron Paul in one moment, and McCain in the next. Republicans have taken so many positions on this, I am beginning to think that they are the frustrated authors of the Kamasutra and are angry that they just didn't get enough credit for all the different positions they have come up with!

So what IS the Republican position today on this, aside from the exact opposite of whatever Obama has done?

What is YOUR position of what Obama SHOULD have done with your vantage point(and the usual Republican vantage point of after the fact and with 20-20 hindsight since they have long forgotten what leadership is)?

Do you need a few weeks to see how things play out so that you gain the proper and usual Republican "perspective"?

I thought so.





[Edited by: Passer at 9/11/2013 4:42:00 PM EST]
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,066
Points:1,916,895
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 11, 2013 2:57:49 PM

I have to admit though that Obama has managed to accomplish a feat that heretofore I would have considered impossible. Here we have a man who has been vested with the power to command the most formidable and potent military force ever seen on planet Earth, and yet he has still managed to manipulate events such that his allies don't respect him and his enemies don't fear him. It takes a very special kind of man to be handed control of the power to destroy the world, and yet be able to neutralize that power and himself, while still holding it, in less than six years. 99.99% of the people on the planet could never accomplish that feat.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:74,225
Points:3,084,095
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Sep 11, 2013 2:45:58 PM

I posted this in the other Syria thread:

The Two Most Important Questions to Ask About Syria - by Col. Bill Spencer

>>>
Your responsibility as a citizen of this great nation is to ask of your elected representatives in Washington just two questions before this country should go to war over anything.

The first: “When is it victory?”
To ask “When will it be over?” misses the point.

The second: “What do we want the world to look like after the war/military action is over?”

If we don’t know enough to determine that formulation, or won’t determine that formulation, we have no reason to pursue the issue any further. <<<

Some vague notion of rogue nation leaders cowering in their bunkers in abject fear of the awesome power of the U.S.A. isn't a clear enough goal to answer question number 2, much less question number one.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,066
Points:1,916,895
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 11, 2013 2:44:53 PM

btc: "When we say we will defend red lines set by world orders then we must do it! "


"World orders" huh? I wasn't aware that Obama gave orders to the world with his "red line" ultimatum. Apparently the rest of the world doesn't think much of his ability to give orders on their behalf either considering the amount of support they've offered to defend his "world orders". Obama is a buffoon who can't even fight his way out of a paper bag he put over his own head. ROFLMAO!!


mudtoe
Profile Pic
btc1
Champion Author Lexington

Posts:23,254
Points:894,035
Joined:Aug 2006
Message Posted: Sep 11, 2013 2:38:25 PM

Like the Pres. said last night, AC, it would set a precedent to be taken advantage of by other rogue countries. AND, it would alert Iran to a weakness of our standing in the world. THAT cannot happen. When we say we will defend red lines set by world orders then we must do it!
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,586
Points:3,489,445
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Sep 11, 2013 1:22:24 AM

btc1 asks: "Why would it NOT be in our national interest to give the Assad (Ass----) of Syria a spanking??"

--And exactly what is the tactical need for us to invade Syria? Exactly what is the US national security interest? Please enumerate for all of us what the imminent threat to the US is from Syria?
Profile Pic
Passer
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:19,641
Points:2,339,490
Joined:Jan 2004
Message Posted: Sep 10, 2013 9:32:09 AM

"Wasn't electing Obozo TWICE as POTUS the equivalent of putting a "Kick Me, I'm Stupid" sign on our own backs?"

Nominating Palin was the absolute proof. She WAS the best Democratic nominee ever for a position at that level.
Profile Pic
jeskibuff
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:10,790
Points:2,078,305
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 10, 2013 8:08:12 AM

MahopacJack said: "Are we being played for fools by this administration and the media?"

Wasn't electing Obozo TWICE as POTUS the equivalent of putting a "Kick Me, I'm Stupid" sign on our own backs?
Profile Pic
jeskibuff
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:10,790
Points:2,078,305
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 10, 2013 8:04:03 AM

SemiSteve said: "If Obama attacks his peace prize should be rescinded."

He did nothing to deserve it in the first place. If he had had any integrity, he would have refused it the day it was awarded."
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,697
Points:1,879,490
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Sep 9, 2013 7:05:25 PM

btc1, >>So why this time is there less support to provide just air strikes to disable the ability to use these chemical weapons against Children, Women and Men who are innocent to the idea of war?<<
~
Here's some proof.......

Only its the US backed rebels that are attacking Syrians with chemicals!

From the Link, "The footage adds to the increasing weight of evidence that suggests US-backed rebels possess and have used chemical weapons on more than one occasion, although such reports have been habitually downplayed by the mainstream media."

Are we being played for fools by this administration and the media?
~

[Edited by: MahopacJack at 9/9/2013 7:08:46 PM EST]
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,066
Points:1,916,895
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 9, 2013 5:20:01 PM

SUV: "So, with the UN still holding out, if the President attacks with or without the support of Congress, he'll be in violation of what heretofore it appeared he considered to be SACRED international law, doctrine he seems to place much higher than our own Constitution."


It's not about international law or norms. This is totally about ego and pride. If this were a bygone era Obama would have slapped Assad in the chops with a glove and told him that he demanded satisfaction, for Assad embarrassing him like that, at dawn tomorrow with dueling pistols. That's what this is really all about.


mudtoe



[Edited by: mudtoe at 9/9/2013 5:21:15 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SUVFan
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:292,000
Points:2,272,955
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Sep 9, 2013 5:08:46 PM

I don't think there can be much doubt that the President supports the Muslim Brotherhood. Helping that bunch get traction in Syria is the only apparent military objective at this point.

There's a new clincher against the use of force. Apparently Syria has not subscribed to a treaty that's necessary to permit military action without UN approval. So, with the UN still holding out, if the President attacks with or without the support of Congress, he'll be in violation of what heretofore it appeared he considered to be SACRED international law, doctrine he seems to place much higher than our own Constitution.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,066
Points:1,916,895
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 9, 2013 4:59:42 PM

SE3.5: "Obama is looking like a war monger. Putin is looking like a diplomat. Whoda thunk it."


Yes, what a strange turn of events. Obama is looking and acting like the old Soviet leaders of the 1970s in their ill-fitting suits and with their bellicose rhetoric, and Putin is looking like the rational, sober, world leader. Yikes! What's happening?!?


mudtoe
Profile Pic
xrdc
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:6,990
Points:668,275
Joined:Apr 2008
Message Posted: Sep 9, 2013 4:23:23 PM


"If Obama attacks his peace prize should be rescinded"

He doesn't have to attack to be an enemy of peace. Threats & declarations to attack are already frightening the Syrian people. Some might call it "terrorizing".

=-=-
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,567
Points:449,545
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 9, 2013 4:13:53 PM

If Obama attacks his peace prize should be rescinded.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:24,239
Points:3,816,640
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 9, 2013 3:50:03 PM

Obama is looking like a war monger. Putin is looking like a diplomat. Whoda thunk it.
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:12,586
Points:1,156,680
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Sep 9, 2013 9:22:45 AM

Interesting read. Published on the Huffington Post website, Syrian Parliament letter to the U.S. House of Representatives. It's a high resolution scan, so you may need to hit the minus magnifying glass button on the lower right of the page to make it smaller.

The letter and accompanying article both indicate that the Syrians are practically begging for diplomatic steps to be taken first before Congress commits to militarily attacks on their country. "A Boehner spokesman declined to comment."

Of course, diplomacy begins at the Executive Branch, where it should have been tried first before even considering taking a vote for military action against Syria.

IMHO
Post a reply Back to Topics