• 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!

Congress not rushing back for Syria vote

i don't know, but no one on here besides myself care enough to be asking such details.

i don't think the rebels could have been the ones behind the attacks, mainly because it is my belief that chemical weapons require specialist training in order to handle them. i don't think the rebel forces have any one with the knowledge to handle chemical weapons, and the only way we would know if they did use chemical weapons is if the chemical weapons blew up in their faces or backfired on them.

well, I believe it to be one of two things.

The rebels purposely creating a false flag situation, or one of their ammo dumps being hit.
 
Yes, and I find it odd that this administration is going to disagree with the UN.

Good evening, Lord of Planar. :2wave:

All we heard, prior to Kerry stating on TV the other day that Assad was responsible, was that we had to wait for the UN report. Well,

the UN has given their report, and it stated that the rebels were responsible! Why is the administration continuing to dither on

this, stating now that they need congressional approval? They didn't know they needed it before? I guess Libya doesn't count,

because BHO went directly to the UN for approval that time. Very strange.... :wow:
 
Last edited:
You are right; that makes the situation even worse.

Let's say Assad is toppled. Btw, I am not saying he's a good guy in any way. Then you wind up with a new civil war afterwards to figure out who gets to control the pile of ashes.

Again, the best case scenario is a destabilized middle east...



The Middle East is already destabilized and it's only going to get worse..Jordan and Lebanon, Eygpt... I seldom agree with any Republican, but I think John McCain has the right idea and may be why the Pres. decided to go through Congress...
 
Haven't exactly been pushing for peace either...

Edit; most sensible people on both sides 85-91% oppose military action against Assad, but that's not going to stop obama and friends.



I guess we will just have to wait and see...
 
There is your problem. They say world leader as something people voluntarily follow. We lead the way into the future implies that people chose to follow us. What you are talking about is fascism. We will become the world's leader through force and dictates. Those are not the same thing. In one case you are a leader because your way is good and people eventually realize that. The other you lead because you are strong and the good is not inherent. You are trying to claim we are an inherent leader when really we are fallible and using force. You are no better than conservatives who claim rightousness through religion.



The original plan was to go in immediately to take out the launchers and air fields so it would be more difficult to launch chemical weapons and to punish them for launching these gas attacks on their own people, and to discourage others from doing so...It is not necessary to foam at the mouth and attack me...
 
Mornin' Juanita.
hat.gif
Well since we will use that argument. Then should we not go and do a drive by on the Syrian Rebels for the use of Chems and more than once? Drop some cruise Missiles on their forces too.

Just to show them that we will punish them too.

Didn't Obama say he wants to be fair. Do the Right thing?



Well, we already have a war on terror and if we do go in perhaps we should broadcast that as well...We seem to know where they are located...
 
The original plan was to go in immediately to take out the launchers and air fields so it would be more difficult to launch chemical weapons and to punish them for launching these gas attacks on their own people, and to discourage others from doing so...It is not necessary to foam at the mouth and attack me...
So like in Libya, you want to make one side defenseless...
 
The whole ME mess bothers me...

It bothers all of us.

So what pressing reason is there for us to take military action, that will do any good?
 
Or maybe W Bush used up all the goodwill from other countries who helped with Iraq.

//

Obama did that all by himself with the Brits.
 
The FSA is infested with al Qaida, reporters have documented dozens of stories throughout this Syrian war in which they have kidnapped journalists and UN officials, destroyed Christian churches, tied civilians hands and shot them execution style, placed truck bombs in front of federal buildings killing civilians and host of other crimes against civilians. The CIA should never have been training them in their Jordanian camps, arming them and sending them in there to begin with. Even that is something that should have been debated by congress. The Assad government is recognized by many nations as the legitimate Syrian government. China and Russia absolutely will not allow the US to obtain authorization for use of force at the UN. So unless your advocating our president attack another country that has not first attacked us, in violation of international law, he has no other alternative. And, you can't even get Rumsfeld on board with this one!!!



Unfortunately, Alqaida is all over Syria now.. We waited too long to really help... Now all we can do, or already should have done, is to lob a few missiles and take out their launchers and air fields and its probably too late to do that as well....
 
Why do we have to "help" at all?

Agree. Maybe if there were a clear perpetrator and a clear victim it would be easier to rationalize "help". Perhaps there was a time when this existed at the very beginning and we missed the boat to do something positive as others suggest. Now, I believe our continued support of the rebel groups is for 2 reasons. 1: Oppose whatever the Russians and Iranians support, and 2) we feel like we must be involved in everything to some extent or another. Our media shows pictures of rebels violated by Assads forces, and Russian tv shows Assad's forces violated by rebels.

I see that you're libertarian so I don't share your view of stay out of every world affair, but I am with you to stay out of this one (ones which can only hurt us and decrease our credibility).
 
Congress to Vote on Syria

The Middle East is already destabilized and it's only going to get worse..

Thanks to previous intervention in affairs that simply are not out business.

Jordan and Lebanon, Eygpt... I seldom agree with any Republican, but I think John McCain has the right idea and may be why the Pres. decided to go through Congress...

He will go through congress only because it's the only venue left that can give some form of legitimacy to attack...

I guess we will just have to wait and see...

If I was a betting man, obama will attack; assad will shoot back, then the stories will be about how Assad attacked us and the stories of the heroism of the survivors, and then it will be the 70% + approval required to start a war effectively (on that front) an suddenly the people will be to get boots on the ground.

Hell, we already forgot about armin Alquaida with anti-air heat-seeking missiles (equivalent to stingers) on Benghazi. So maybe some planes get shot down and that's the justification for more forces.

The general population is shockingly gullible sometimes...
 
Congress to Vote on Syria

Unfortunately, Alqaida is all over Syria now.. We waited too long to really help... Now all we can do, or already should have done, is to lob a few missiles and take out their launchers and air fields and its probably too late to do that as well....

Wait, do you mean lob missiles to HELP or to HURT alquiada forces?? People seem to forget that we are officially at war with alquiada, and now we are usin flimsy reasoning to attack another nation on alquiada's behalf (mostly not Alquaida specifically, but allies directly and indirectly).

Frankly, the lies have compounded so high that we are literally entering a 1984 system where war is for peace, and today's enemies are tomorrows allies and we never question the change.
 
It bothers all of us.

So what pressing reason is there for us to take military action, that will do any good?



Good question... Now? Not very much--we have lost all advantage of surprise--they are now prepared for us, have moved everything, have consulted with Iran and planned their strategy... It should have been done immediately....
 
Obama did that all by himself with the Brits.




Actually, that is not true.. The Brits referenced the war in Iraq as the main reason they would not participate in Syria...The lack of WMD in Iraq...
 
Unfortunately, Alqaida is all over Syria now.. We waited too long to really help... Now all we can do, or already should have done, is to lob a few missiles and take out their launchers and air fields and its probably too late to do that as well....

How exactly would throwing a few missiles at Syria achieve anything and solve anything. This would simply be a sign of impotence and frustration. One expects that of children, not of the World's greatest superpower.
 
Good question... Now? Not very much--we have lost all advantage of surprise--they are now prepared for us, have moved everything, have consulted with Iran and planned their strategy... It should have been done immediately....

Agreed. This attack is all wrong. I can't remember a president ever openly attacking another nation to "send a message". Talk about considering the US the world's police or baby sitter! If he wanted to send that message he should have acted and then explained why he hit Syria with 25 missiles etc. This is being handled all backwards.
 
So like in Libya, you want to make one side defenseless...

Libya = Gadaffi = Pan Am Flight 103 = Operation El Dorado Canyon = dirtbag needed to die. I'm glad Obama went into Libya to take care of business. It was a long time coming. Shame we lost four American patriots while they were trying to get our weapons back after they were done using them. That part really bothers me.
 
How exactly would throwing a few missiles at Syria achieve anything and solve anything. This would simply be a sign of impotence and frustration. One expects that of children, not of the World's greatest superpower.

Should we just neutron bomb Damascus? That'd be hard core and send a serious message!
 
Back
Top Bottom