• 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!

John Kerry: ‘We Are Not Going to Lose’ Vote Authorizing Syria Military Action'

Snappo said:
Are you one of those 9-11 crazies that think 9-11 planes were controlled remotely by the CIA or something? Wow. You hear about those crazies, but I never met one before now.

The White House issued an overview of the classified information and stated they had geo-spacial (satellite) and on-the-ground proof of who did the gassing. If you are one of those government conspiracy loons then I can't help you.
Click to expand...

How much sarin gas is accessible to the FSA? How much notice did the FSA have of the intended targets for the Assad rockets? How much additional gas was released by Al Qaida after the Assad rockets hit their targets? Why is Saudi Arabia supplying Sarin gas to the FSA?

Why does Saudi Arabia want the US to bomb Assad's facilities in Damascus and Syria?

Do you support McCains call for Syrian regime change? How about supporting the Syrian Presidential elections in 2014?

Future elections
•Parliamentary - 2016
•Presidential - May 2014


IFES Election Guide - Country Profile: Syria


http://www.law.yale.edu/RCW/rcw/jurisdictions/asw/syrianarabrep/syria_constitution.pdf


//
 
Last edited:
Gladiator said:
How much sarin gas is accessible to the FSA? How much notice did the FSA have of the intended targets for the Assad rockets? How much additional gas was released by Al Qaida after the Assad rockets hit their targets? Why is Saudi Arabia supplying Sarin gas to the FSA?

So you support McCains call for Syrian regime change? How about supporting elections in 2014?

Future elections
•Parliamentary - 2016
•Presidential - May 2014


IFES Election Guide - Country Profile: Syria

//
Click to expand...

Support McCain? Support him for what...making the next level on the game he was playing on his cell phone during the Kerry debate with the Senate on the language for the resolution on going to Syria? When asked why he was playing the game for 3 hours...he said out of boredom.

Apparently not enough violence going on during the debate for McCain. Kerry was being too passive.

Go, go, go McCain....!....NOT...

Let me guess who'll win the election in Syria in 2014...hmmmmm..mmmmm....uhhhhh...ASSAD?

Good questions about Sarin gas...
 
Last edited:
Beaudreaux said:
Surely you're trolling with that. There's no way you can honestly believe what you wrote. Is there?
Click to expand...

Trolling is not my thing, and I have no need to do so in this instance. The fact is - the US Constitution is a guiding document like any other, and only has significance in domestic matters. Where the US is signatory, and where the matter involves international affairs, international legal instruments supercede US domestic laws. Of course the US is free to flout international law, and there is currently no individual nation who can oppose that militarily (something of which some Americans are fond of reminding us), but that does not alter the nature of the crime.
 
Dooble said:
Thank you for your strength & courage during these dangerous times, Mr. Secretary.

John Kerry: ‘We Are Not Going to Lose’ Vote Authorizing Syria Military Action - ABC News
Click to expand...

So another "Mission Accomplished" BS thing. Nice.

It never ceases to surprise me how liberal and conservative rail so hard about how they're different and in the end they do the exact same thing. Thanks Busama! Glad we can have another 10+ years of war to cost thousands of American lives for no reason.
 
Thrilla said:
he's right... Congress with vote "yes" to military strikes.
Click to expand...

Of course they will. It doesn't matter how many Americans they'll kill, the Government will do anything for its power and the wealth of its buddies.

9/11 killed 3,000 Americans, how many Americans has the War on Terror killed?
 
Will the Senate and the House both vote, whatever their vote is, before 9/11 next Wednesday?
 
Leo said:
Trolling is not my thing, and I have no need to do so in this instance. The fact is - the US Constitution is a guiding document like any other, and only has significance in domestic matters. Where the US is signatory, and where the matter involves international affairs, international legal instruments supercede US domestic laws. Of course the US is free to flout international law, and there is currently no individual nation who can oppose that militarily (something of which some Americans are fond of reminding us), but that does not alter the nature of the crime.
Click to expand...


Very accurate assessment Leo.
 
Ikari said:
So another "Mission Accomplished" BS thing. Nice.

It never ceases to surprise me how liberal and conservative rail so hard about how they're different and in the end they do the exact same thing. Thanks Busama! Glad we can have another 10+ years of war to cost thousands of American lives for no reason.
Click to expand...

That first "Mission Accomplished" accompanied with the incredibly stupid "Bring It On" will live in Infamy for tens of thousands of American families, without even mentioning the Iraqi civilians.
 
Ikari said:
Of course they will. It doesn't matter how many Americans they'll kill, the Government will do anything for its power and the wealth of its buddies.

9/11 killed 3,000 Americans, how many Americans has the War on Terror killed?
Click to expand...

More to the point, the paranoid style of American politics virtually requires most politicians to vote for military action in almost any situation or they risk being called "unpatriotic" by the rightwing noise machine that has poisoned our political rhetoric since the Cold War. It takes one brave politician to vote against firing missiles at another country. It will be interesting to see which ones step up to the plate -- but I agree, they will be in the minority by far.
 
Snappo said:
The US Constitution does not give power to any other bodies to create laws beyond the USA Legislative Branch.
Click to expand...

That is so, and neither does any other sovereign state. But as signatory to the UN, we are all bound by its articles - and have committed a breach of international law if we flout any one of those.

Snappo said:
If UN passes a law saying you have to kill your mother, are you going to just go out to Walmart and buy an aluminum baseball bat and smash her skull in?
Click to expand...

As you say - of course not. And no nation would remain signatory to the UN under those conditions. But I am attempting to address a serious question here - not conjecture about fantastical hyperbole.

Snappo said:
Of course not - because USA is not beholden to laws created by some half crazed lunatics from the arab coalition or some third world country that doesn't even contribute money and soldiers to the UN.
Click to expand...

Arrogance - thy name is conservative America! :mrgreen:

Look, I realise that certain Americans look upon the UN as an agency that can be bought in order to facilitate US interests across the globe, but I am sure those who think like that have realised by now that is not the function of the organisation. The UN does not 'create' laws, it enacts the wishes of the international community (not just those nationas with the most money and power) and codifies them into international legal instruments.

Snappo said:
The UN is an irrelevant body and it has no power over me here in USA. My life is only restricted and controlled by US Code and State Code. F**K the UN.
Click to expand...

Except where your nation is signatory to international laws and conventions (as with all of us). :lol:
 
head of joaquin said:
More to the point, the paranoid style of American politics virtually requires most politicians to vote for military action in almost any situation or they risk being called "unpatriotic" by the rightwing noise machine that has poisoned our political rhetoric since the Cold War. It takes one brave politician to vote against firing missiles at another country. It will be interesting to see which ones step up to the plate -- but I agree, they will be in the minority by far.
Click to expand...

I don't think there's anything paranoid about it. I think it's completely purposeful and serves the Corporate State and the Aristocracy.
 
Ikari said:
I don't think there's anything paranoid about it. I think it's completely purposeful and serves the Corporate State and the Aristocracy.
Click to expand...

Yep. DC, congress critters and the POTUS, serve those that supply the necessary campaign cash to keep them in power. Political party labels are much like sport's teams uniforms - merely something to identify the different teams as they play the same game by the same rules and with the same objective - to win fan support. Winning in politics is getting/keeping the power to spend other people's money as directed by your sponsors, the campaign contributors.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yep. DC, congress critters and the POTUS, serve those that supply the necessary campaign cash to keep them in power. Political party labels are much like sport's teams uniforms - merely something to identify the different teams as they play the same game by the same rules and with the same objective - to win fan support. Winning in politics is getting/keeping the power to spend other people's money as directed by your sponsors, the campaign contributors.
Click to expand...

Yup, and this is how you lose a Republic.
 
Ikari said:
Yup, and this is how you lose a Republic.
Click to expand...

Yep. 92% of congress critters and the POTUS won re-election in the 2012 elections so all is well in camp DC, as far as they are concerned; as they freely spend more money borrowed in our names. ;)
 
Dooble said:
Thank you for your strength & courage during these dangerous times, Mr. Secretary.

John Kerry: ‘We Are Not Going to Lose’ Vote Authorizing Syria Military Action - ABC News
Click to expand...

Being stupid does not equal having strength and courage. Obama drew the Red Line and that was as stupid as it gets. Mr. Hinze Kerry Secretary of State is a follower of stupid. This is the most stupid administration of all time, of which has no clue on running a country. A community organizer my ass.
 
Leo said:
That is so, and neither does any other sovereign state. But as signatory to the UN, we are all bound by its articles - and have committed a breach of international law if we flout any one of those.
Click to expand...

You are incorrect. There is something called the Supremacy Clause in the US Constitution. It guarantees that the US Constitution is the supreme law of the land and that no treaty (or State Code) can ever override US Code. It doesn't matter to me what a POTUS signs in the way of treaties with other countries. I am in no way beholden to the UN or the laws of any other country. Ever.
 
Ikari said:
Of course they will. It doesn't matter how many Americans they'll kill, the Government will do anything for its power and the wealth of its buddies.

9/11 killed 3,000 Americans, how many Americans has the War on Terror killed?
Click to expand...

Another 4K or so. On the opposite side of the fence - so far estimations are that we have killed between 1 million and 2 million bad guys. The part I don't understand - why do these arab countries still think they can mess with the US of A? They have to know the numbers are not in their favor.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That is half way there then but the other half, that they acted under official orders, remains unknown.
Click to expand...

I am fine with the concept of security clearances and the classification of information. Meaning: I am cool with Obama knowing things you and I don't know.

ttwtt78640 said:
I am not implying that the 9/11 acts were not terrorism, just that the owners of the aircraft were not held criminally responsible.
Click to expand...

Well the good news is you aren't one of those 9-11 loons and we can keep talking. In Georgia quite a few people I knew thought the actual planes with the US citizens were seen after the event hidden at the Cleveland Airport and that all the people on the plane were spirited away into some some secret witness relocation type of program. Same loons also talked about how the CIA blew up the buildings with special explosives. There is no reasoning with folks like that. Why would the owners of the aircraft be held liable? If a drunk driver kills someone in a car rental, is it OK to sue Ford (owners of Hertz)? I could see going after Saudi Arabia since they were all Saudi citizens, maybe going after the government agency in charge of the metal detectors, or perhaps the manufacturer of the planes for not making the cockpit safe enough. But truth be known - I am pretty sure there was a class action already against the plane manufacturer that got thrown out of court.
 
head of joaquin said:
More to the point, the paranoid style of American politics virtually requires most politicians to vote for military action in almost any situation or they risk being called "unpatriotic" by the rightwing noise machine that has poisoned our political rhetoric since the Cold War. It takes one brave politician to vote against firing missiles at another country. It will be interesting to see which ones step up to the plate -- but I agree, they will be in the minority by far.
Click to expand...

So even Obama has given in huh?
 
head of joaquin said:
More to the point, the paranoid style of American politics virtually requires most politicians to vote for military action in almost any situation or they risk being called "unpatriotic" by the rightwing noise machine that has poisoned our political rhetoric since the Cold War. It takes one brave politician to vote against firing missiles at another country. It will be interesting to see which ones step up to the plate -- but I agree, they will be in the minority by far.
Click to expand...

Last time I checked, it was Obama who was creating most of the "noise" pushing for military action. A leftwinger.
 
head of joaquin said:
More to the point, the paranoid style of American politics virtually requires most politicians to vote for military action in almost any situation or they risk being called "unpatriotic" by the rightwing noise machine that has poisoned our political rhetoric since the Cold War. It takes one brave politician to vote against firing missiles at another country. It will be interesting to see which ones step up to the plate -- but I agree, they will be in the minority by far.
Click to expand...

Last I remember it was Obama that drew the RED LINE, a socialist. And like a socialist he now says he didn't say it but instead the world said it. Now we have a puppet for a president.
 
Snappo said:
I am fine with the concept of security clearances and the classification of information. Meaning: I am cool with Obama knowing things you and I don't know.



Well the good news is you aren't one of those 9-11 loons and we can keep talking. In Georgia quite a few people I knew thought the actual planes with the US citizens were seen after the event hidden at the Cleveland Airport and that all the people on the plane were spirited away into some some secret witness relocation type of program. Same loons also talked about how the CIA blew up the buildings with special explosives. There is no reasoning with folks like that. Why would the owners of the aircraft be held liable? If a drunk driver kills someone in a car rental, is it OK to sue Ford (owners of Hertz)? I could see going after Saudi Arabia since they were all Saudi citizens, maybe going after the government agency in charge of the metal detectors, or perhaps the manufacturer of the planes for not making the cockpit safe enough. But truth be known - I am pretty sure there was a class action already against the plane manufacturer that got thrown out of court.
Click to expand...

Because the two airlines involved were negligent in allowing such a simple thing as passengers being easily able to take over and pilot the aircraft. The success rate of those attempts was 100%. 4-5 morons armed with boxcutters could not likely succeed in robbing a bank or even the typical gas station. We do hold the registered owners of vehicles responsible for their abuse; examples are red light and radar triggered camera tickets. Rental cars must be covered by liability insurance and are not furnished with drivers.

It is certainly strange that we make most businesses, even nuclear power plants and gun/ammo/drug stores, supply their own security personnel/equipment, yet have decided to protect the airlines from that responsibility - essentially rewarding their failure to do so. The makers of aircraft, like the makers of cars and busses would gladly offer locking operator compartments (and increase their profit) if that is what the customers wanted (police cars and cabs?) - they are liable only if what they did make/install did not work properly.
 
Fisher said:
God I hope they attach the authorization to a bill to repeal obamacare and outlaw abortion just to watch democrats stroke out.
Click to expand...
I just want the bad guys, whoever they may be, to get what's coming to them!
 
Dooble said:
I just want the bad guys, whoever they may be, to get what's coming to them!
Click to expand...

Mornin Dooble. :2wave: Well that wont be happening.....As Idris and all his backers are hiding in Turkey. Where they stay hiding until Assad is killed or driven out. Then they will go back into Syria. Having never lifted a finger to do any thing to put their asses on the line.

Course now those MB backers and Salafists have no problem going out and fighting. Also going after Christians when they can't get their way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom