Page 28 of 52 FirstFirst ... 18262728293038 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 280 of 515

Thread: 'War-weary' Obama says Syria chemical attack requires response

  1. #271
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: 'War-weary' Obama says Syria chemical attack requires response

    Haven't we seen this all before in history? Even been told many of the same things ie: Limited in scope, etc?

    Didn't JFK say "Our involvement in Viet Nam is to be limited in scope".....???? Hmmmm.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  2. #272
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: 'War-weary' Obama says Syria chemical attack requires response

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    The idea seems to be that somebody should be attacked for what's going on in Syria, so lets do it some time soon so we can have some credibility.

    They may find a reason for an action on Youtube.

    Right. But I was being facetious, Americans don't want it, congress is likely to say no, the UN already has said no repeatedly. It must be dropped. It's both illegal and very stupid. While I very much agree with those here that point out that Putin WILL NOT get involved militarily, all I have to say is there are NO guarantees. In 1936 Hitler was on the cover of Time Magazine as man of the year!!!! This whole thing is FOOLISH talk.

  3. #273
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: 'War-weary' Obama says Syria chemical attack requires response

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Haven't we seen this all before in history? Even been told many of the same things ie: Limited in scope, etc?

    Didn't JFK say "Our involvement in Viet Nam is to be limited in scope".....???? Hmmmm.

    Proper observation!

  4. #274
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: 'War-weary' Obama says Syria chemical attack requires response

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Right. But I was being facetious, Americans don't want it, congress is likely to say no, the UN already has said no repeatedly. It must be dropped. It's both illegal and very stupid. While I very much agree with those here that point out that Putin WILL NOT get involved militarily, all I have to say is there are NO guarantees. In 1936 Hitler was on the cover of Time Magazine as man of the year!!!! This whole thing is FOOLISH talk.
    I'm against it more for the stupidity than the legality. America should be free to decide what is in its own best interests, not the corrupt UN. I don't believe it is in the best interests of the US to attack Syria now because of the plodding President and all the hoops which were created.

    The US will never gain any credibility under Obama, but America can regain credibility, perhaps, if they elect a leader who arrives in office and make a quick decision to respond to some international atrocity. Dithering after lines were drawn and crossed does no good at all. It screams weakness.

  5. #275
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: 'War-weary' Obama says Syria chemical attack requires response

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    I'm against it more for the stupidity than the legality. America should be free to decide what is in its own best interests, not the corrupt UN. I don't believe it is in the best interests of the US to attack Syria now because of the plodding President and all the hoops which were created.

    The US will never gain any credibility under Obama, but America can regain credibility, perhaps, if they elect a leader who arrives in office and make a quick decision to respond to some international atrocity. Dithering after lines were drawn and crossed does no good at all. It screams weakness.
    Americans say NO, congress will come back and say NO, the UN (which we are a member of, hello!!) says NOOOOOOO!

    It's both stupid, illegal and risky. Jesus Christ, we have not been attacked by Syria, and sooner or later China and Russia are going to shut us down on this practice of attacking countries that haven't attacked us. It is not weak to refrain, it's following rules and its SMART.

  6. #276
    Professor
    SBu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Washington State
    Last Seen
    01-18-16 @ 03:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,523

    Re: 'War-weary' Obama says Syria chemical attack requires response

    Quote Originally Posted by reinoe View Post
    It's manufactured support. Just like how "hundreds of nations" allied with the U.S. in Iraq. As for "Never again", I rolled my eyes so hard I got a sprain. But this does confirm something I mentioned earlier: establishment Democrats and Republicans love warmongering in equal measure.
    Agree. Shouldn't we care more about being directly "misled"? Are we just too used to this kind of thing that we're numb to it?

  7. #277
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: 'War-weary' Obama says Syria chemical attack requires response

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Americans say NO, congress will come back and say NO, the UN (which we are a member of, hello!!) says NOOOOOOO!

    It's both stupid, illegal and risky. Jesus Christ, we have not been attacked by Syria, and sooner or later China and Russia are going to shut us down on this practice of attacking countries that haven't attacked us. It is not weak to refrain, it's following rules and its SMART.
    So far I have to agree....

    Hell, even Nancy Pelosi's five year old grandson gets it.....

    REP. NANCY PELOSI: I'll tell you this story and then I really do have to go. My five-year-old grandson, as I was leaving San Francisco yesterday, he said to me, Mimi, my name, Mimi, war with Syria, are you yes war with Syria, no, war with Syria. And he's five years old. We're not talking about war; we're talking about action. Yes war with Syria, no with war in Syria. I said, 'Well, what do you think?' He said, 'I think no war.' I said, 'Well, I generally agree with that but you know, they have killed hundreds of children, they've killed hundreds of children there. ' And he said, five years old, 'Were these children in the United States?' And I said, 'No, but they're children wherever they are.'

    Pelosi Uses Conversation With 5-Year-Old Grandson To Push For Attack On Syria | RealClearPolitics
    Good Lord! When a five year old gets it, and his grandmother realizes only after she's related the story that it was a mistake to even tell the story, we are in real trouble....
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  8. #278
    Professor
    SBu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Washington State
    Last Seen
    01-18-16 @ 03:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,523

    Re: 'War-weary' Obama says Syria chemical attack requires response

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    It's difficult not to see the political ramifications no matter what Obama does. He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. I wouldn't want to be in his shoes and have to make such a decision.
    I agree, it looks bad politically no matter what he does. His focus should then be on what's best for us, and not politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    I haven't made up my mind about Syria, so I might ask questions in order to have a better understanding from different perspectives to have a more informed opinion. Sometimes I might assert a position just to see how it stands up to scrutiny and opposing opinions. But really, my opinion on Syria is not written in stone and I reserve the right to change my mind as I learn and gain more information. I pretty much know most the reasons for not striking Syria, but didn't really know the reasons to strike. So thank you SBu for providing a reasoned and civil discussion and while we may not always agree, I look forward to having many more with you.
    I was trying to lighten the tone of discussion. Sorry if it came across the wrong way. If you know all the reasons not to strike, and need to fish for possible reasons to strike, isn't that a tall tale sign that striking is not such a good idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Can a country that hasn't signed the chemical warfare agreement still be tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity? If so, then why can't and why shouldn't the signed countries intervene when they are used? Where is the teeth in such agreement if the nations that signed do nothing?
    Now this is an interesting question. I'm not sure. Would have to research this a bit more. My gut feeling is that law is always shades of gray. One can manipulate it to some degree and bring charges against almost anyone for anything. There isn't teeth in much that the international community does.

  9. #279
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: 'War-weary' Obama says Syria chemical attack requires response

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Americans say NO, congress will come back and say NO, the UN (which we are a member of, hello!!) says NOOOOOOO!
    Membership in the UN means nothing. What good does it do if only the democracies are following the rules?
    It's both stupid, illegal and risky. Jesus Christ, we have not been attacked by Syria, and sooner or later China and Russia are going to shut us down on this practice of attacking countries that haven't attacked us. It is not weak to refrain, it's following rules and its SMART.
    China and Russia are probably less of a threat because that would involve a major war, which the US could possibly win. But they can't seem to win against piss-ant countries because they lack the will to go all the way. It would not do China or Russia and good to fight a real war. Traditional wars have become largely obsolete anyway. There are now many other ways to break a people's will.

  10. #280
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: 'War-weary' Obama says Syria chemical attack requires response

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    So far I have to agree....

    Hell, even Nancy Pelosi's five year old grandson gets it.....Good Lord! When a five year old gets it, and his grandmother realizes only after she's related the story that it was a mistake to even tell the story, we are in real trouble....
    Maybe Nancy had a momentary acid flashback to her Haight Ashbury days. Wars still kill flowers and other living things.

Page 28 of 52 FirstFirst ... 18262728293038 ... 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
  •