Congress hasn't been threatening to commit an overt act of war... in a country we have no compelling interest in.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
After all the Democrats spent 8 years argueing under Bush that we aren't the worlds policemen...
|
Congress hasn't been threatening to commit an overt act of war... in a country we have no compelling interest in.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
After all the Democrats spent 8 years argueing under Bush that we aren't the worlds policemen...
Bush sent a lot of troops to Iraq. Obama says NO troops. Just bombs and thing that go boom. To be honest I'm not sold on getting involved with a Syrian civil war, but if they use gas, no doubt others will to, so its COMPLEXED.
But as part of a greater coalition, like more Arabs from the region, that would add weight to any actions we could take. Alone, NO!!
Iraq was violating a cease fire agreement they had with us...Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I know the concept of what a cease fire agreement is, is a bit much for Democrats to grasp... but we have one in Korea too... and have since the 1950's.
What business exactly do we have with Syria anyway... who exactly declared the USA was the Worlds policemen... and what right does Obama have to decare war on a country that has done nothing to us or one of our allies yet.
And if we create a vacuum by helping to remove Assad, what will fill that vacuum?Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
Do we ignore the deaths of innocent civilians and let these countries work out their own problems?
Syria is full of degenerates that hate us uanyway... let them kill themselves... if anyone does anything it should be to keep Hezbollah and Iran from sticking their noses into it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
He isn't asking for WAR, he is asking for but a clear message against the use of gas. Banned in the civilized world since WWI.
Where have you been for two years? They already have their nose in it.Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
Sending a bunch of missles into someone else's country to blow things up is by anyone's definition... including the United Nations... an act of war.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Actually, I believe he's just trying to cover his arse.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I think he's already made a mockery of us.Quote:
One U.S. official who has been briefed on the options on Syria said he believed the White House would seek a level of intensity "just muscular enough not to get mocked" but not so devastating that it would prompt a response from Syrian allies Iran and Russia.
"They are looking at what is just enough to mean something, just enough to be more than symbolic," he said.
Yes and there could be retaliation, but there has already been a fallout that has displaced millions across the region, into neighboring countries. What do you need a map or something? The whole region is at war already.Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
I couldn't care less if the entire country of Syria ends up dead... in fact I hope for it... its their problem... not ours at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
If they start lobbing chemical weapons across any of the borders then that would change. Right now its an internal problem.
And exactly how does just enough of a response to "not get mocked" help those millions?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I guess if he went Cowboy like Bush did that would make you happy, and being pragmatic and having consensus and support more broadly isn't something you could support or consider.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Seeing as no action, just debate is what's going on, globally not just here, then your assertion, and that of your pundit you cited is decidedly misleading.
Will toppling Assad end the carnage ? More likely the Allawites will be the subject of ethnic cleansing that will make the cw attack pale in comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
We have done our share of humanitarian aid, and more is needed, as the numbers continue to grow. What do YOU suggest?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
A technicallity is that Syria is not a signatory. His message will most likely kill more Syrians than the cw attack . And he still has no proof ;despite his statement last night ,that it was forces in Assad's control that launched the attack.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
You mistake me for someone clamoring for war, and certainly not given who the CIC is and his performance thus far.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
What's ironic is how the tables have turned. You guys sure do think we've forgotten the Bush years and how things went down. Your version of history is rather creative. It was Bush who went directly to the American people and spelled out what our interests were in both Afghanistan and Iraq. It was Bush that went to the UN and made a case for action, and Bush that sought and received congressional authorization.
Which of these has Obama done?
P.S. I did not cite a 'pundit,' it was a "U.S. official."
Quote:
One U.S. official who has been briefed on the options on Syria said he believed the White House would seek a level of intensity "just muscular enough not to get mocked"
http://imageshack.com/a/img5/5922/jk0a.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
An unnamed US official is a credible source? Naw he is no more than a pundits assistant. I think I join Tom on this one and want proof of WHO used gas. But if Russia and China are found to be backing a dictator that did used chemical weapons, that's a whole different ball of wax in my view.
I would be equally pissed if it was found the rebels were killing innocents with gas to draw the rest of the world into this. The rebel factions are carving up their own parts of the country to control, And I think we gear up and plan before we pick our targets. If it was Assad, yes I would send a force full message (Missiles and air strikes at military targets) and rail on Russia and China in the UN, and in public.
I think it's their inaction that has allowed this cancer to fester and grow in the first place.
Hello again,
I agree that Obama has NO Middle East policy. That's troublesome.Quote:
I think it's their inaction that has allowed this cancer to fester and grow in the first place.
But, in his defense, how COULD you have a policy when everything changes in the blink of an eye?
Excon
And are there any "good guys"? Really?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Dude, if I were that admin official and knew what he/she does I'd keep my name off the record, too. Although I agree this regime is full of talking heads - they're led by one - and as George Will put it, the purpose of this intervention will be "to rescue Obama from his words."
P.S. The Hill picked up on the LA Times blurb...
Official: White House seeks Syria response 'just muscular enough not to get mocked'
As did the NY Post, NPR, FrontPage, Human Events... this is going to go down as one of the all time great foreign policy strategies, "just muscular enough to not get mocked."
Too late...
I am told that before the witches brew of jihadists entered the scene that there was a real national liberation /opposition force (that was early before Benghazi) . But now I say let them fight it out . Let's assume Assad forced did a cw attack. How much worse is that then the jihadists forcing a child to behead someone? (warning graphic video)
Syrian rebels use a child to behead a prisoner « Human rights investigations
How barbaric.
I'm embarrassed that fool Obama is even considered an American...Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Talk about a guy that's trying to compensate for something... what happened to just buying a Corvette... its cheaper and nobody gets hurt.
More from Senator Obama 2007 "
"I would meet directly with Syrian leaders. We would engage in a level of aggressive personal diplomacy in which a whole host of issues are on the table…but right now the only incentive that exists is our president suggesting that if you do what we tell you, we may not blow you up. My belief about the regional powers in the Middle East is that they don't respond well to that kind of bluster. They haven't in the past, there's no reason to think they will in the future."
A hopeful Obama before he was elected and things have dramatically changed in Syria, don't you agree?
Hell things have changed dramatically here as well. The WHOLE world has changed!
For the worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Finally we agree the world has changed for the worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
Where we disagree is WHY... and I believe Obama , his words and his policies are a big driver behind making things worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
He could learn a lesson from the Queen of England... you need to think long and hard about what you are saying in the public arena when you are a speaking for a nation... words alone have consequences. And once spoken can't be taken back.
Royalty means squat to me... but her public behaviour and how she carries herself is deserving of respect on its own merits. Unlike many of her relatives.
The world was going to crap before he got here. And its not crap for everyone, some of us are doing well, and some of us that are doing well are spitting venom on those that aren't.
The Syrian crisis is not Obama's fault and doing nothing about it is common sense. There seems to be some sort of paranoia about poison gas being transported over large distances but the reality is large quantities of pool chemicals pose equal threat within your own borders and yet no terrorist has sought to use them.
You have got to get beyond the idea that the average terrorist is more than a low level gun man. The men who carried out the greatest act of terror in your nation did not use explovises they used something commonly available and no one has yet said that what was used in Syria is not something commonly available. The evidence points to a weapon delived by artilliary but could have just as easily been artilliary hitting something that was already there. Perhaps there was a chemical weapons dump in Damascus
Meanwhile ;the UK ,that does not have a constitution that mandates it ,had a vote in Parliament .They voted to not attack . They then made a request to the PM to honor the sentiment of Parliament... and he agreed.
Here in the US there is a constitutional mandate that war is declared in Congress. That is why GW Bush ASKED Congress for resolutions of war for both GWOT and Iraq. There is an unconstitutional,or of questional constitutionality 'War Powers Act ' that in theory gives the CIC the ability to act under select conditions of national emergency and imminent threat.
The emperor flagrantly violated the terms of the law in Libya.
It appears that both Speaker Bonehead and Madam Mimi have laid down a gauntlet to insist that before the emperor acts ,that he get congressional approval. Lets see if he crosses that red line.
There is no imminent threat to the US, to suggest there is is fantacy. There might be an imminent threat to people in Syria, your CIC has no mandate to defend them without a UN sanction. Yes, laws have been broken, perhaps by the Syrian government but no one has given direct evidence, I think, that because there was an artillery attack in which gas was used that they have the responsibility, so do many others but it is opinion not fact. We all have bad memories of WWI and WWII, this may or may not be repeating those circumstances, to suggest there is a red line is nonsense since the number of deaths has already crossed a "red line". Unilateral action is not an option and to do so is a criminal act in itsselfQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
This sums it up nicely:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/theoatmeal-i...yria/syria.png
The only people that will benefit are Islamic knuckledraggers who will take over...
The red line statement was one of his "off TOTUS" moments. Now his credibity and the nations comes into play because of his foot in mouth disease.
Now the Lone Ranger war monger is prepared to go it alone.
Syria is not a signatory to the international treaty that bans the use of chemical weapon against people. So if her neighbors take no action, neither should we no matter how despicable her actions are or outraged we are.
So stop hollering about Iran having nukes too. Failure to act against one dictator, emboldens them all.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:19 AM. |