Reply With Quote
so gassing women and children is okay with you then. Good to know.
Really, who are we trying to kid here? This whole thing is a mess.
"Chmeical weapons are a red line for the world!"... yes, I can tell by how many are up in arms. Oh wait, none of them. Surely a "red line".
It's not another WWII, and it's stupid to compare it to that. Stop. Just stop.
The same people who said we HAVE to do something about Iraq (and ya know, it will magically get better) are now saying we have to do something in Syria (and ya know, it will magically get better.)
Nice to see that Congress can agree on going to war. Well that and bailing out bankers.
Anti war Democrats? Are you there? Bueller?
Republicans, this does not mean Bush was right.
What's the point of having a chemical weapons ban treaty if we are just going to treat those not on the treaty the same way?
People who insist America will "lose credibility" don't have any credibility to begin with. You know what credibility is? Nukes. We still have enough of those.
I love the idea that the AUMF will allow the President to deal with any "Syrian-ish" related things. You know, like just maybe having to attack people in other countries or things like that. Because an open ended AUMF has never caused problems before.
Blah.
so gassing women and children is okay with you then. Good to know.
Idiots parroting what they see on the Daily Show and popular media. Ignoring the fact that people are actually dying out there while they drive their goty Priuses and F-150s home to their houses in the suburbs, not caring about but their lawns and their taxes. If you stand for nothing you might as well be dead.
Team Murica, YEAH!!!
it's not that Syria's nor any civil war's non-combattant deaths are not cared about.
It's whether (USA) bombing Assad will really accomplish anything, AND what kind of blowback it will cause (eg, more AQ/jihad terrorism against USA)
200,000 people die, no big deal.
1,400 die, suddenly we *have* to respond.
Yep. Logic.
so gassing women and children is okay with you then. Good to know.
These images could have been posted weeks months or years ago and it would have just been a bullet in their head/chest, or the remnants of their body from an explosion. Why is dying from conventional warfare more acceptable?
maybe the women and children in Syria will be better off with the "gifts" the Americans dropped in Iraq:
It's the chemical weapons and it is old cold war thinking.
I think it should come down to what our allies think. If NATO wants to do it then fine but otherwise it. It can stop being a proxy war and start being a war between the players really quick.
thinking bombing the out of the women and children in Syria will rectify the gassing
And what are you doing personally to help the dying Syrians? Do you really believe the US intervening will stop the killing in Syria? It wouldn't surprise me if it sparked more killings, then what?
I don't get what the point of this strike would be. Syria's not going to be any kind of ally no matter which side wins, just like Iraq and Afghanistan ing hate us after we liberat---bombed the out of and killed a lot of them. Gotta agree with LnGRRRRR on the WWII comparison; pretty sure if Assad gassed London and invaded France most of us would support taking him out.
and now perhaps feeling a bit left out, CNN turns to promote the voices and opinions of the citizens of a mighty powerful nation that knows a thing or two about fighting wars:
http://edition.cnn.com/video/?/video...m_homepage=yes
FRANCE
At least with Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, the Balkans, etc. there was international support. Not a whole bunch of countries who are actively opposed to it.
Looks like a good way to start a much bigger war if you ask me.
This thread is full of failwin. Which is that special type of win that only occurs when someone fails so hard they invert the physics of the universe. Congrats phxspursfan.
Anti-war democrats don't want to bomb Syria either.....but can't say the stick and carrot approach hasn't been effective..Anti war Democrats? Are you there? Bueller?
..and this thread needs a graphic images warning...
bombing the out of syrians comes at a price, civilians..lol obamas version of saving the people is bombing them?
When did Obama bomb the ' out of Syrian civilians'?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
