Reply With Quote
Your contention is that Reagan was always perfectly fine with the military use of chemical weapons like nerve gas and mus gas and they are a legitimate way to kill thousands of soldiers.
So be it.
WC supporting the actions of the GOP and denouncing the same when it's the opposition even with a tenuous link? Say it ain't so from the good lil' minion.
Your contention is that Reagan was always perfectly fine with the military use of chemical weapons like nerve gas and mus gas and they are a legitimate way to kill thousands of soldiers.
So be it.
everybody knows they arent destroying , just taking back stock returns and lookng for another buyer
implies something similar to the conclusion reached here, viz., that it was Putin, not Obama, who blinked: http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/...r-the-day-264/
This. Surprising take from a vet.
http://www.theamericanconservative.c...s-world-panic/Roger Cohen’s latest column is one long exercise in hyperbole. This passage is especially misleading:
Britain abandons its closest ally at crunch time. The European Union is divided, Germany silent, France left dangling, and NATO an absentee. If there are other pillars of the trans-Atlantic alliance, do let me know.That sounds terrible, doesn’t it? Then you realize that Cohen is judging the state of the “trans-Atlantic alliance” solely on whether or not it can be used to wage war on a country that poses no real threat to Europe nor America. Britain didn’t “abandon” the U.S. at “crunch time.” It’s not as if the U.S. came under attack and then Britain ignored its treaty obligations. Britain opted out of a punitive American war of choice. One might as well pretend that Eisenhower “abandoned” Britain and France when he opposed their attack on Egypt. This sort of thing makes sense only to someone who thinks that alliances require a government to endorse the least defensible mistakes of their allies. Most Americans are grateful that the vote in Britain helped to halt the push for an attack. Of course, the European Union is always divided on foreign policy, which is a function of the EU’s own internal problems and tensions, and NATO is not involved because it has absolutely no cause to be. If most of the world is against military intervention in Syria, Cohen doesn’t take that as evidence that there may be something wrong with intervening, but instead concludes that there is something very wrong with the current world order.
If the most visible issue dividing Western governments at present is whether or not to bomb Syria, that suggests that Cohen’s talk of an “anchorless world” is wrong. Cohen already panicked about the demise of the so-called “special” relationship for the same reason, but now he thinks that the entire postwar order is supposedly coming unglued because the U.S. didn’t attack another country. In other words, he thinks that the postwar order designed to prevent states from attacking other states is in jeopardy because the U.S. has been temporarily stymied in its effort to attack Syria.
I can not wait to get these warmongers out of the public realm.
I don't know if Reagan was OK with it or not. I'm saying that when you go from using weapons on soldiers, to using them on civilians, that is a definite crossing of the line. War is , and there are few rules. Soldiers are a tool to be broken by the opposing side. How do you enforce right and wrong on such actions?
The record proves he was OK with it. He knew about it for five years.Not giving them money and support probably would have done something, don't you think?I'm saying that when you go from using weapons on soldiers, to using them on civilians, that is a definite crossing of the line. War is , and there are few rules. Soldiers are a tool to be broken by the opposing side. How do you enforce right and wrong on such actions?
us = pos weak country a joke tbh
Ya, you'd be goose steppin right now if it werent for the US you pitiful little surrendermonkey
obama is hollande's btch
And you're ST bottom with anus agape
that sounds kinky
do want
I have no doubt you do gaylord
The feeling is mutual, asshole.
I drawz red linez in sandz fur personalz atakz
Cat got your tongue, huh???
What, you dropped your infantile posting style? It won't help your credibility I assure you. You have none and your ty takes and obvious lame-ass trolls will prevent you from ever having any.
Let me be clear - we need to urgently act or not act as part of an international coalition or alone to demolish or degrade or mildly inconvenience the Syrian regime's chemical weapons capability to send a message that the United States will not stand by or will stand by while civilians are killed by chemical weapons. I or the United States or the World set a red line, and the world cannot or maybe wont or will act decisively or indecisively or quickly or or over a protracted period hesitate to send an unmistakably clear or ambiguous powerful or unbelievably tiny message to Assad: It is time for you to go or to stay.
Dont be mad at chump, he skipped on Remedial Reading courses at UTSA because he was just gonna study to become a photographer for the Austin Toros.the link proves the opposite actually.
Your claim that Saddam destroyed his WMDs is a complete fabrication on your part
otherwise, prove it.
gtown mad
wow. that explains a lot. I'll lay off the poor guy from now on
I totally forgot what I did to hurt gtown so badly.
E-grudges are funny
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
