46
   

Do we really have to take military action to Syria?

 
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 02:35 pm
I could go either way. It is clear that Assad is doing great evil in the world, but it isn't our duty to write every wrong. What he is doing doesn't pose a simple and direct threat to American interests. Still, many innocent people are suffering. It is like being much bigger and stronger than all of the other kids at school and seeing a kid beat another for his lunch money in your presence. You don't want to get involved, but you know that you could stop it if you wanted to. The main inaccuracy in this comparison is that at school, you can appeal to a higher authority who can also intervene, which we cannot in international politics.
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 02:40 pm
@Brandon9000,
that is what we said about Saddam, but is the world better off after we spent all of that blood and treasure?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 03:09 pm
@izzythepush,
The US will ignore the UN as they see fit.
spendius
 
  3  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 03:25 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
Nonsense. Those of us who think it is wrong to use nerve gas on civilians are all for prompt action.


It is a grave error of taste as well as of logic to think that only those in favour of prompt action think that using nerve gas on civilians is wrong.

Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 03:33 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

that is what we said about Saddam, but is the world better off after we spent all of that blood and treasure?

Actually, it isn't even remotely what we said about Saddam. President Bush said repeatedly and consistently that we were going in because of the (common) fear that he had secret WMD development programs.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 03:33 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

that is what we said about Saddam, but is the world better off after we spent all of that blood and treasure?

Actually, it isn't even remotely what we said about Saddam. President Bush said repeatedly that we were going in because of the (common) fear that he had secret WMD development programs.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  0  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 03:36 pm
@izzythepush,
Quote:
I might have known you'd be opposed to greater democracy.


To convict anybody of anything in a trial, at least in the US, you have to demonstrate a motive. What motive would Assad have for using nerve gas on anybody???

On the other hand, if you're talking about slammite hoodlums wanting to get the US and/or NATO involved in their bullshit, there actually are precedents:

https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=clinton+izetbegovic++5%2C000&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
gungasnake
 
  0  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 03:38 pm
@gungasnake,
http://dobbs.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/02/07/genocide_without_corpses_0

Quote:
...What explains this behavior are statements that guys like Hakija Meholjic (Srebrenica's war-time police chief) have made suggesting that Izetbegovic and Clinton wanted a massacre of at least 5,000 Muslims in Srebrenica so that NATO would have a pretext to intervene in the war on the side of the Muslims. ...
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  0  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 03:42 pm
Putin says this whole thing is bullshit:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/russia-sharply-steps-up-criticism-of-us-over-syria/2013/08/31/532c48ea-1238-11e3-a2b3-5e107edf9897_print.html

Guess what?? That's right, at this point, I'd come a whole lot closer to believing Putin than I would he likes of Obunga, Kerry, or H KKKlintler.

Quote:
Putin said he was sure the attack was the work of rebels trying to provoke international — and especially American — involvement in the Syrian conflict. The government of Bashar al-Assad, he said, would have had no reason to use chemical weapons at a time when it had gained the upper hand in the fighting.


roger
 
  4  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 03:51 pm
@gungasnake,
I don't rate any of the above very high on a credibility scale, but darned if I accept Putin for unbiased information.
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 03:52 pm
@roger,
We live in a relativistic world. More believable than Bork Obunga and John Kerry in't asking for much...
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 04:26 pm
From Yahoo News.
Quote:
The president’s hastily arranged remarks — demonstrators protesting outside the White House gates could be heard from the West Wing only minutes before he spoke — sucked the urgency out of what had looked like a imminent military strike.

Instead, cruise missile-carrying warships off Syria’s coast will have to wait until the week of Sept. 9. That’s when Congress returns from a month-long vacation to take up a measure, drafted by the White House, giving Obama the green-light.
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 04:36 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Instead, cruise missile-carrying warships off Syria’s coast will have to wait until the week of Sept. 9. That’s when Congress returns from a month-long vacation to take up a measure, drafted by the White House, giving Obama the green-light.


And if we're very lucky, congress might tell Bork Obunga to go **** himself.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 05:02 pm
@gungasnake,
FYI, that should be "dork" Ubunga.

He prefers spending money to increase war rather than supplies for our school children and the homeless - in OUR country.
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 05:05 pm
@gungasnake,
Where does this latest flounce out leave M. Hollande?

What a big deal it must be for everything to be on hold until the holidays of the members of Congress have been satisfactorily completed and Mr Obarmy has had his round of golf with Veepie.

I think it was Thackery who reported that the Prince of Wales laid the foundation stone with the tap of a rubber hammer, departed for his dinner and left the workmen to complete the edifice.
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 05:06 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

FYI, that should be "dork" Ubunga.

He prefers spending money to increase war rather than supplies for our school children and the homeless - in OUR country.


Does the money grow on trees? You were a financial auditor. Wouldn't you know that to spend money, one has to first earn it. The factories are in China. What do we sell, if not military hardware. Think boychick.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 05:12 pm
@Foofie,
Your history is behind the times. The US factories are increasing production, because it's cheaper to produce many products at home rather than in low cost labor countries like China. China's manufacturing production is down, and Europe is still suffering from a recession - with the exception of a few countries.

Energy cost including transportation adds costs to those products produced in other countries for US consumption. Energy cost in the US is one of the lowest in developed countries. US productivity is one of the highest in the world.

Who said "money grows on trees?" Only ignorant people.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 05:16 pm
I love it when spendi talks to himself. Remember way back when we all thought spendi and the world traveler, whateverhisnamewas, were one in the same? Set thinks that Foofie is a Miller sock puppet, but seriously... am I the only one who has noticed a difference is spendi's tone lately?
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 05:25 pm
@JPB,
It is merely that I am more ready to fling caution to the winds these days. Not too much though.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Aug, 2013 05:29 pm
@spendius,
You and me both.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/10/2021 at 04:21:47