• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

House Speaker John Boehner will support strike on Syria

Yeah I need to hear the exact freedoms Syria is envading on. Since we are protecting Merica and all. Honestly I am getting to the point that someone needs to smack the hell out of US. Where did the Politicans get the gall to invade, bomd, other countries, and tell us that they are protecting our freedoms?? Buncha jerks, the sad part is people believe these loons.

I just heard kerry on tv say all the left wing emotional buzzwords while "testifying" about what our role should be.


Now to young, naive kids and idealists this all sounds SOOOOO good...but to people who have seen all this before it's typical, empty political doubletalk.

Sen. Johnson just commented/asked Kerry if it was true that; "Originally the opposition was more western leaning, more moderate and democratic and as time has gone by has been degraded and infiltrated by Al Qaeda?;

Kerry said; QUOTE "No, that is basically not true. the opposition has increasingly become more defined by its' moderation and more defined by the breadth of it's membership and more defined by its' adherence to ...some...you know...democratic process and to an all inclusive, minority protecting constitution which will be broad based and secular to the security of syria."END QUOTE

LMMFAO..I think he got them all in one sentence..."moderation", "breadth of membership", "democratic process", "broad based", "all inclusive", "minority protecting" and "security".

Now anyone over about 15 years old sees this as pure propaganda and playing on peoples emotions and prejudices..

If anyone is against bombing syria, therefore, they are not moderate (radical?), they are undemocratic, they are "exclusive" (HORRORS!), "against protecting minorities" (gotta get SOMETHING in about minorities..they've learned how THAT word works on americans) have a narrow agenda (opposite of "broad based) and would cause the country to become "insecure"..LMFAO..as if it were ever "secure" anyway.
 
Last edited:
Then how about defending the Syrian people from Assad? Russia has supplied 1.5 billion dollars worth of weapons to the regime and yet has spent less than 100 million in aiding the Syrian refugees, the United States has supply's more aid to the refugees then Russia and china combined.

Here is a breakdown of humanitarian aid

http://fts.unocha.org/reports/daily/ocha_R24_E16303___1309021603.pdf


And this is Russia trading cash for weapons with the Assad regime.
Insight: Syria pays for Russian weapons to boost ties with Moscow

Syria and Iran and Russia are ally's, Iran has a mutual defense treaty with Syria. Russia has warned that this will spread to a regional war! Had the US kept out of Syria from the beginning, Assad would have crushed the rebellion early on and there wouldn't be 100,000 dead, and we wouldn't be talking about this escalating into a regional war. This is insanity people.
 
Good on Boehner.
 
wartime tax rates need to go into effect the second this is approved, should happen automatically whenever we do anything like this, and should stay in place until the end of the mission. it should affect all brackets, and the increases should be significant.

shared sacrifice. perhaps this will remind the American public why we should think twice about being the pro bono police force.
 
OMG, let the bombing begin so we can get our Milk Duds and popcorn!

Actually, I'm hoping that the bombing will strike against both the Army forces and the Al Nusar front, clearing the way for the FSA to once again dominate the opposition. Hopefully the administration will work out closer coordination with the FSA. They have potential.
 
What depresses me is that the only thing to get Boehner and Obama to agree on something is war.
 
Actually, I'm hoping that the bombing will strike against both the Army forces and the Al Nusar front, clearing the way for the FSA to once again dominate the opposition. Hopefully the administration will work out closer coordination with the FSA. They have potential.


That's beautiful Jred, except our own law does not allow us to bomb nations that haven't attacked us. Why is there such trouble with this. This is most elementary.
 
What depresses me is that the only thing to get Boehner and Obama to agree on something is war.

it's not just Boehner and Obama.. it's reps and Dems... and it's been that way for a lot longer than any of us have been around.

bipartisan support for bombing other countries is as predictable as the sunrise....
 
Syria and Iran and Russia are ally's, Iran has a mutual defense treaty with Syria. Russia has warned that this will spread to a regional war! Had the US kept out of Syria from the beginning, Assad would have crushed the rebellion early on and there wouldn't be 100,000 dead, and we wouldn't be talking about this escalating into a regional war. This is insanity people.

What is insanity is standing by and letting the Syrian people get gunned down and murdered. Russia has supplyed more weapons to the Assad regime than it has supplied aid to the Syrian refugees.

Russia is making profits from the Assad regimes massacres of its people.

If the rebals seize the city that serves as the Russian naval base, I wonder if Russia will stand by and do nothing?
 
What is insanity is standing by and letting the Syrian people get gunned down and murdered. Russia has supplyed more weapons to the Assad regime than it has supplied aid to the Syrian refugees.

Russia is making profits from the Assad regimes massacres of its people.

If the rebals seize the city that serves as the Russian naval base, I wonder if Russia will stand by and do nothing?

Attacking a country that hasn't attacked us violates our own law. Why is this difficult again?
 
Attacking a country that hasn't attacked us violates our own law. Why is this difficult again?

There are laws banning the use of chemical weapons. We are one of the major supporters of that law and it is our supposed duty to prevent people from violating that law.
 
There are laws banning the use of chemical weapons. We are one of the major supporters of that law and it is our supposed duty to prevent people from violating that law.


Syria isn't a signer of that treaty so they don't recognise it's authority. Kind of like the US conveniently doesn't recognise the authority of the ICC (obviously because we'd spend a lot of time there defending ourselves). And one more time. Attacking a country that hasn't attacked us VIOLATES OUR CONSTITUTION. IT'S ILLEGAL. Or are you one of those guys that thinks one wrong plus one wrong equals one right?
 
There are laws banning the use of chemical weapons. We are one of the major supporters of that law and it is our supposed duty to prevent people from violating that law.

****, give me a break. We're one of the major manufacturers of chemical weapons! And when it "suits our interests" we both provide them and in courage their use. Don't be an accomplice of US hypocrisy on this.
 
****, give me a break. We're one of the major manufacturers of chemical weapons! And when it "suits our interests" we both provide them and in courage their use. Don't be an accomplice of US hypocrisy on this.

We no longer manufacture chemical or biological weapons, and in fact, have just finished destroying our previous stockpiles...
 
We no longer manufacture chemical or biological weapons, and in fact, have just finished destroying our previous stockpiles...

I don't know that all of them have been destroyed, if and when it happens it will be a great trend. But the hypocrisy remains.


The U.S. chemical weapons program began during World War I. Chemical weapons production directed principally against people ended in 1969. For nine years between 1962 and 1971 approximately 20 million gallons of defoliants and herbicides were sprayed over Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia by the US military resulting in an estimated 400,000 people killed or maimed and 500,000 children born with birth defects as a result of what were called 'rainbow herbicides' in Operation Ranch Hand.[1] The United States renounced chemical weapons in 1997 and destruction of stockpiled weapons is still ongoing.
 
I don't know that all of them have been destroyed, if and when it happens it will be a great trend. But the hypocrisy remains.


The U.S. chemical weapons program began during World War I. Chemical weapons production directed principally against people ended in 1969. For nine years between 1962 and 1971 approximately 20 million gallons of defoliants and herbicides were sprayed over Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia by the US military resulting in an estimated 400,000 people killed or maimed and 500,000 children born with birth defects as a result of what were called 'rainbow herbicides' in Operation Ranch Hand.[1] The United States renounced chemical weapons in 1997 and destruction of stockpiled weapons is still ongoing.

The effects of Agent Orange were not understood at the time. There was never intent to use those agents for anything other than their original purpose, and if you choose to post from another source, links are always appreciated...

BTW, I would have thought you would have objected more to the use of napalm for clearing caves...
 
The effects of Agent Orange were not understood at the time. There was never intent to use those agents for anything other than their original purpose, and if you choose to post from another source, links are always appreciated...

BTW, I would have thought you would have objected more to the use of napalm for clearing caves...

That would be an objection as well. Sorry, thought it was obvious.
List of U.S. chemical weapons topics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
The effects of Agent Orange were not understood at the time. There was never intent to use those agents for anything other than their original purpose, and if you choose to post from another source, links are always appreciated...

BTW, I would have thought you would have objected more to the use of napalm for clearing caves...

Oh, I see we didn't know it would kill people and make more defective. I feel better now.
 
Oh, I see we didn't know it would kill people and make more defective. I feel better now.

There are many instances like this throughout history, and they are not confined to war. Think asbestos...
 
I must have missed your point, if there was one...

My point was always that the US manufactured and used chemical weapons for the better part of a century an supplied them to others for their use. You pointed out that they have though stopped making them and have or currently are destroying stockpiles. That's a good thing. I don't know that you and I have a disagreement really. Unless you think that Syria is bound to a treaty they haven't signed.
 
I don't think it's necessary, but with Republican backing it will happen. With Congressional approval which will blow some minds here.

How many posts until Boehner and Cantor get called "RINOs?"

Limbaugh, Palin and the rightwing noise machine will call him a RINO for cooperating with Obama and then say Obama isn't being touch enough on Syria because he's an Arab loving jihadist, but he's leading us into war because he takes his orders from Wall Street, when he's not a Marxist, which is always.

It's what conservatives do when they move their mouths.
 
Back
Top Bottom