- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 56,981
- Reaction score
- 27,029
- Location
- Chicago Illinois
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Private
EXACTLY. But don't come in here and rain on the war mongers parade.
Now now MC
EXACTLY. But don't come in here and rain on the war mongers parade.
Now now MC.....you know you can't take away from what is best in life. :lol: :2razz:
In the short term, yes, but all options should be on the table for the future. I could see NG becoming a major factor while we explore long term solutions...
EXACTLY. But don't come in here and rain on the war mongers parade.
War monger's parade? But this thread is full nansy pansy peaceniks...
Yes, there are a few diplomats in here as well.
Were. They've all been run off by the partisan drivel pages ago.
I don't believe I've seen your links to any other proof. I know that the mainstream media in the US is adjusting the information due to intelligence agency manipulation to gin up a war. I just read an AP (associated press) article today that said the rebels used gas in December and that is the UN report you just linked to. The rebels used the gas, and gosh, they fooled AP or own AP, as is the more likely case. War is good business. OIL in Syria. Nice port on the Med. Great pipeline route. The first profits of war go to the energy corporations like Exxon/Mobil, Chevron, BP, Total, etc. because wars run on energy and if new resources fall into the energy corporations hands as a result of the war, they will profit again. Any competent marketing department would push for new war/wars at every opportunity. Oh Wait. Wars aren't about OIL Wait, lobby money from BIG Energy corporations to politicians isn't the same as bribes.
Not emotional...? I think that you were in such a blind emotional rage that you didn't read your own post. It was laced with hatred. Fact is that the Treaty does not require members to react with force. Your opinion is just that. Your opinion also does not match the facts. The facts clearly show that 46 other nations sent military personal.
Judging by your snark level in that post, it might come as a surprise to you that I'm not for this pending war and I'm not buying the propaghanda being pushed right now and I don't believe any war in the M.E. is far from oil as it's hidden reason or a GRREEEAAAAT "side benefit" of a war there. To me this looks like Gulf of Tonkin all over again or Bush Sr's bull**** about Saddam throwing babies out of incubators into the streets prior to Gulf War I or Rumsfeld's bullcrap of WMD's ("They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat").
I'm just not buying it. We haven't been told the truth leading us into any war since WWII and even that sell was suspect.
That being said, Russia has been an Assad ally for all this time that Assad has been our enemy. Syria has been a major foothold for Russia in the M.E. They want to keep that foothold with their buddy Assad. That combined with the stranglehold Putin and the like have on their media and any information over there makes that source of yours suspect.
Oh, so THAT is why Bush went it? Who knew?
Were. They've all been run off by the partisan drivel pages ago.
l remember hiroshima
Bush " went it " after the Democrats voted to go to war, after Clinton in 98 made repeated threats to use force if Saddam didn't curtail his growing WMD program.
The false narrative that "Bush lied " has been thoroughly debunked on this forum.
Exactly. There is a difference between being incorrect and lying. A lie in this instance would be that Bush knew there were no WMDs but used it as a predicate for war anyway. There is no evidence for this whatsoever.It's been debunked all over the world. It only remains in the minds of those that refuse to leave the partisan plantation.