• 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!

Should we go into Syria

Should we go into Syria

  • Yes, the red line has been crossed

    Votes: 23 13.9%

  • No way Jose, not our problem

    Votes: 143 86.1%
  • Total voters
    166
RDS said:
Syria will be third muslim country in a row. Iran will most likely be the fourth muslim country. The fifth I can't say for sure. Maybe trouble makers are all in muslim countries.
Click to expand...




Being a Muslim Country has nothing to do with it... Assad has been killing his own people for two years and has now unleashed chemical weapons on them.. We are supposed to be the world's leader and everyone is looking to us to lead--to do something about the situation..
 
Nope. No good guys. Either way we lose.
 
Juanita said:
Being a Muslim Country has nothing to do with it... Assad has been killing his own people for two years and has now unleashed chemical weapons on them.. We are supposed to be the world's leader and everyone is looking to us to lead--to do something about the situation..
Click to expand...

There is no concrete proof yet that Assad has been using chemical weapons. It could also be Saudi supplying chemical weapons to the rebels.
 
RDS said:
There is no concrete proof yet that Assad has been using chemical weapons. It could also be Saudi supplying chemical weapons to the rebels.
Click to expand...
I know, the butler did it, with the Sarin Gas, in the Library right?
 
Ok, compromise. If one loses control of ones dictatorship to the point that chems are about - that's it, game over, next gvt.
 
hits TOL with a wrench
 
I voted No.

1- President Obama hasn't sold the American people on a legitimate "reason". Not that I think he would be able to. More on that.

2- Our country is already in approximately $17 trillion in debt - with no clear solutions since the problem started.

3- This is a problem amongst 2 groups where the Syrian Government isn't our ally, but the Rebels have ties to Al-Qaeda. So, we have nothing to gain and lots to lose by going to war there.

4- This one's just a bonus reason. Not that I believe the beliefs or disbeliefs of others is always necessarily a clear legitimate justification to have an opinion, but rather it's just the icing on the cake, so to speak. The UK Parliament recently voted against intervention in Syria. Which is basically saying that it isn't even in the interest of assisting our allies. And that if we got involved, then we're doing so as a form of disrespect towards our allies.
 
I agree even the Brits know this is stupid but you do know that we've already been involved for quite sometime Right?
 
Tothian said:
I voted No.

1- President Obama hasn't sold the American people on a legitimate "reason". Not that I think he would be able to. More on that.

2- Our country is already in approximately $17 trillion in debt - with no clear solutions since the problem started.

3- This is a problem amongst 2 groups where the Syrian Government isn't our ally, but the Rebels have ties to Al-Qaeda. So, we have nothing to gain and lots to lose by going to war there.

4- This one's just a bonus reason. Not that I believe the beliefs or disbeliefs of others is always necessarily a clear legitimate justification to have an opinion, but rather it's just the icing on the cake, so to speak. The UK Parliament recently voted against intervention in Syria. Which is basically saying that it isn't even in the interest of assisting our allies. And that if we got involved, then we're doing so as a form of disrespect towards our allies.
Click to expand...

This is nothing more than Obama involving himself in a messy situation, and now he's trying to save face. This backfires on us either way now. He was arrogant, and now he's paying the price, or actually WE will pay the price. :roll: This whole situation just turns my stomach.
 
TheNextEra said:
No, we shouldn't. If the U.N. wants to authorize some sort of action where it would require multiple countries support in both troops and money, maybe. But not just the U.S.
Click to expand...

Finally , one of the few who realizes that there still is a UN.
And to those who do think that we should be the world's policeman...a lump of coal.....
 
There may indeed be some accuracy in that statement. We should be on the same side as Russia in this situation. NOT siding with Al-Qaeda!!!

How odd would it be if: we actually told the Rooskies that if they wanna put boots on the ground in Syria in support of Assad
we'd offer material support (and air cover) ? Can't you see who we are fighting here? Do you buy that crap that we can't know who to support?
That each side is as bad as the others? Syria is a craphole but at least it was a craphole where its people weren't being killed en masse hah that would be
like an Iraqi pining for the days of American occupation because as of today they are in the middle of a shooting civil war?
It is all so bloody easy for us to sit here in our 1st world countries with our 1st world problems and pass judgement on the folks
being killed by the tens of thousands by the jihad jonnies. wake the F up. Will the next 9-11 have to be a truck bourne
13 kiloton Iranian enriched Uranium Gun-type fission weapon detonated on our soil to get you to think we should pick a side in this Crusade?

*ha ha ha that will certainly draw the attention of the NSA monitoring algorithm just to be sure lemme throw in a few more for good measure*
Plutonium fissile tritium supercriticality U-238 tamper beryllium reflector X-ray driven ablation implosion
 
AngryOldGuy said:
Plutonium fissile tritium supercriticality U-238 tamper beryllium reflector X-ray driven ablation implosion
Click to expand...

Now, I know how damaging an ordinary plutonium fissile tritium that was tampered with barelyllium can be regarding driving X-ray into an ablation! But... When joined in with SUPERCRITICALITY and IMPLOSION... Steady there fella! That can take in the entire half of the planet!!

How are you informed with all this!!! You were not suppose to know this at this time of century?!!?
 
ChrisL said:
This is nothing more than Obama involving himself in a messy situation, and now he's trying to save face. This backfires on us either way now. He was arrogant, and now he's paying the price, or actually WE will pay the price. :roll: This whole situation just turns my stomach.
Click to expand...

I think that is happening too. It is about face now. Go ahead throw some bombs and get the heck out from supporting Al-Qaeda (if they indeed are the prime beneficiaries from this intervention).

Otherwise you could kick Assad and then get back to Al-Qaeda maybe?
 
DDD said:
You were not suppose to know this at this time of century?!!?
Click to expand...
Now you've REALLY gone and dunnit DDD :lamo
wait someone's beating on my front door, something about a flashbang
 
I am going to just throw this here for the heck of it:

What if this Al-Qaeda is no longer as evil as it once was with Bin Laden stationed in Afghanistan? You have been kicking some Al-Qaedan butt for so long that perhaps these are now the remaining good guys?
 
I bet the Nobel committee is REALLY regretting its peace prize now. Obama is on TV saying going to attack Syria no matter what congress says, but hes going to go ask them first so he can then ignore them and the citizens who don't support him either. And of course he gave his speech and then walked away without answering any questions. Must have a tee time.
 
Last edited:
Obama speaks. He will seek authorization from Congress to strike...but that he feels he has full authority to do so with or without their approval.

Case of national security my ass.
 
DDD said:
I think that is happening too. It is about face now. Go ahead throw some bombs and get the heck out from supporting Al-Qaeda (if they indeed are the prime beneficiaries from this intervention).

Otherwise you could kick Assad and then get back to Al-Qaeda maybe?
Click to expand...

I'd rather just sit back and let them fight each other. I feel no need to have our troops over there getting involved in this mess.
 
Art 1
Congress shall have the power:

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

Art 2
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States
Click to expand...

Its pretty clear that the constitution was written to have congress decide when we go to war. And the Presidents role is to command the military when that happens. Isnt Obama a constitutional professor?
 
I think the 17 people who voted to go in because the red line had been crossed, need to brush up on their reading and comprehension skills. There is zip, zero, nada evidence that Assad used Chemical Weapons. There is beaucoup evidence that the rebels used chemical weapon at least two times. I realize that the USA lapdog press hasn't published the evidence of use by the rebels, so search the Internet. Actually find out what is going on. If you suspect CIA intrigue, you're getting warm. Maybe this Nation did learn something from GW Bush's huge lies to get us in to war. Could the citizens be wising up after all.
 
Clearly jonny the government is no longer bound by the Constitution
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom