Page 20 of 30 FirstFirst ... 101819202122 ... LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 296

Thread: Navy ready to launch first strike on Syria

  1. #191
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:41 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,337
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Navy ready to launch first strike on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    Very weak, but I see you're clinging bitterly to your lame defense of leftists protesting to have America go to war where we have no national interest and in the backyard of the brilliant Europeans, and smashing America, it's troops and its then very popular president for trying to neutralize a despot we all believed had WMD and also believed was very possible he could hand some off to terrorists.

    The Germans had a paper about the massive costs of life and commerce that would happen if a little tiny bit of Saddam's WMD was unleashed on the western world. But of course... Saddam would never have cooperated with terrorists. He was an upstanding despot that would only use WMD on his own people.
    So you still do not realize that different things are different. I find that fascinating.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  2. #192
    Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    11-30-13 @ 07:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,293

    Re: Navy ready to launch first strike on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Red_Dave View Post
    Saddam didn't do anything even approaching level of destruction seen in either the Al-Anfal campaign or whats happening in Syria after the establishment of the safe haven system. I would agree that these attacks were used as part of a long list of 'reasons Saddam Hussein is bad' but they were'nt the primary justification for the invasion, that intervention had already happened over a decade earlier and was largely supported across the political spectrum despite taking place (in part) under a Republican president. Surely you see the different in urgency here?

    Furthermore intervention in Syria will look a lot more like Kurdistan 1992 than Iraq 2003, no one worth their salt is considering an armed occupation.
    No. If fact, I think it's a lot less urgent now. Our country has not just been on the receiving end of a major terrorist attack where thousands of our people were killed. Syria has not been shooting at members of our military on an ongoing basis as Iraq had. Syria has not threatened it's neighbors or invaded it's neighbors like Iraq had. Our head of our CIA has not, to my knowledge, briefed our President on Syria being a huge threat to us as happened during Iraq.

    No one is considering an armed occupation? Then why do anything? A bigger mess is all that will be creating by a massive bombing campaign.
    "“If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf — places like Charleston, South Carolina; or Savannah, Georgia; or Jacksonville, Florida…” -Obama

  3. #193
    Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    11-30-13 @ 07:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,293

    Re: Navy ready to launch first strike on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    Oh, so THAT is why Bush went it? Who knew?
    Like it or not, it is in fact one of the reasons.

    Why didn't you know this?
    "“If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf — places like Charleston, South Carolina; or Savannah, Georgia; or Jacksonville, Florida…” -Obama

  4. #194
    Libertarian socialist

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 07:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    6,730

    Re: Navy ready to launch first strike on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by ItAin'tFree View Post
    No. If fact, I think it's a lot less urgent now. Our country has not just been on the receiving end of a major terrorist attack where thousands of our people were killed. Syria has not been shooting at members of our military on an ongoing basis as Iraq had. Syria has not threatened it's neighbors or invaded it's neighbors like Iraq had. Our head of our CIA has not, to my knowledge, briefed our President on Syria being a huge threat to us as happened during Iraq.

    No one is considering an armed occupation? Then why do anything? A bigger mess is all that will be creating by a massive bombing campaign.
    See Libya See Iraqi Kurdistan. Also one would have thought that 9/11 being two years before Afghanistan would have been a greater priority.

  5. #195
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Navy ready to launch first strike on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    Do you feel better calling him Heinz Kerry? What is that supposed to signify? LIke Hussein Obama? At least Kerry wasn't a Chicken-$$$$ chicken-hawk like the co-POTUSs last decade.
    Well.....truthfully you can still call Kerry a Chicken hawk.....moreover the Neo Lib is the one that was writing Legislation for nation building in Egypt and Afghanistan. Then getting Johnny Quest McCain to sign along with him.

  6. #196
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Navy ready to launch first strike on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Here is how History plays it out.

    Four events were decisive.
    1. The Reagan administration cemented Egypt, the largest and most important Arab country, into the U.S. alliance system.
    2. Reagan oversaw the weakening of the Soviet’s strongest Arab ally, Iraq.
    3. Middle East events forced the Soviet Union toward an (ultimately doomed) reconstruction of its economy.
    4. Then the final shove: In 1985, the Reagan administration persuaded Saudi Arabia to increase oil production.

    Between 1985 and 1986, Saudi Arabia increased oil production from two million barrels a day to five million barrels. The oil price tumbled as oil supply surged: from US$30 a barrel to US$20 in just a few months.

    The effect on the Soviet economy was devastating. Oil was the Soviet Union’s main – practically only – exportable product, the most important source of hard currency for the economically stagnant regime.

    As former Soviet prime minister Yegor Gaidar details in a 2006 book, the Saudi action cost the Soviet Union $20 billion a year, money that had been used to pay for food imports from the West. How to close the sudden financial gap? The Soviets borrowed from Western banks.

    As the Soviet economy stalled, borrowing needs increased. By 1989, the Soviet Union needed US$100-billion to avoid food shortages. That desperate need for Western loans precluded any Soviet intervention when first Poland and then the rest of the Warsaw Pact shook off Soviet rule in the spring, summer and fall of 1989.

    The Reagan administration’s Middle East policy broke the Soviet empire. But no political achievement lasts forever. The price of oil has soared again, re-empowering Russia and other bad actors like Venezuela and Iran.

    The Reagan policy has run its course, as all policies do. But no statesman is expected to solve the problems of all time. The 40th President of the United States magnificently surmounted the problems of his time. We honor Ronald Reagan most not by replicating him, but by emulating him: by doing not what he did, but as he did. He was the right leader for his time. Modern conservatives need to discover the right leadership for their time.....snip~

    How Reagan’s Mideast Policy Won the Cold War
    Venezuela and Iran are bad actors, really. And the US of course is a good actor. You have the talking points down. Rah Rah Reagan!
    I didn't see anything about a tripling of our national debt in his eight years or Iran/Contra in that very pro-Reagan rant.

  7. #197
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Navy ready to launch first strike on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Venezuela and Iran are bad actors, really. And the US of course is a good actor. You have the talking points down. Rah Rah Reagan!
    I didn't see anything about a tripling of our national debt in his eight years or Iran/Contra in that very pro-Reagan rant.
    Well, I wasn't asked about that. I was asked about Iraq and then I gave the reason why he won the cold war and why Iraq was beholden to Russia. I doubt any can say he didn't out spend the Russians either.

    Of course Iran and Venezuela are bad actors......like I have always said to tell them. Never step up on the Stage unless one is willing to be the exhibit. Myself.....I don't think the Lightweights have any Right in flapping those tongues. Especially since they can't step up to the plate and even take a swing at the ball.

  8. #198
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Navy ready to launch first strike on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Well, I wasn't asked about that. I was asked about Iraq and then I gave the reason why he won the cold war and why Iraq was beholden to Russia. I doubt any can say he didn't out spend the Russians either.

    Of course Iran and Venezuela are bad actors......like I have always said to tell them. Never step up on the Stage unless one is willing to be the exhibit. Myself.....I don't think the Lightweights have any Right in flapping those tongues. Especially since they can't step up to the plate and even take a swing at the ball.

    Can you rephrase your Venezuela/Iran criticism. And if Iran is a bad actor, how isn't the US as well.

  9. #199
    Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    11-30-13 @ 07:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,293

    Re: Navy ready to launch first strike on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Red_Dave View Post
    See Libya See Iraqi Kurdistan. Also one would have thought that 9/11 being two years before Afghanistan would have been a greater priority.
    See Libya? LOL. In my lifetime, I have witnessed our country commit several horrible blunders in foreign policy/action. Libya comes in second place right after the Bay of Pigs disaster and it has the potential to be far worse than that. Nothing has been solved in Libya, additional problems have been created. Gaddafi is dead and Obama has managed to turn that into a mistake with global ramifications. Why should any leader of a country that the US is having issues with do as the US wants, when if it does, the President of the US may still have the foreign leader killed? That's what happened with Gaddafi. Foreign leaders will not miss that point, at all. Damed if you do, damned if you don't: might as well do as you wish.

    As far as what's happening in Libya on the ground right now, the country is in chaos. Government officials from Chad and Algeria have long said many of Gaddafi's weapons ended up in the Islamic Maghreb (Al Qaeda light), some SAM's included. The current government in Libya doesn't control all of the country and where it does it has ties to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which of course has links to Al Qaeda.

    No, the world could have done without this added headache.
    "“If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf — places like Charleston, South Carolina; or Savannah, Georgia; or Jacksonville, Florida…” -Obama

  10. #200
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Navy ready to launch first strike on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Can you rephrase your Venezuela/Iran criticism. And if Iran is a bad actor, how isn't the US as well.
    Sure.....neither Iran or Venezuela should be trying to affect our interests in any adverse way. As they are unable to take us on in anything. So they definitely should not be out on the World Stage flapping those tongues. Talking any type of Smack talk.....at all, and definitely not making any threats.


    Now we may have been a bad actor thru sheer incompetency. But we have never really tried to be the Bad Guys or the Bad Actors with purpose.

Page 20 of 30 FirstFirst ... 101819202122 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •