Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You argued repeatedly, on thread after thread, that you believe that the rebels are doing the attacks. The FACTS--the intelligence information presented to the world from multiple countries--contradicts that completely. You can have your own opinion (based on actual facts), but you don't get to make up your own "facts" and start ranting from there. There is zero evidence that the rebels were the people behind the use of sarin gas or any other WMD on a large scale.
As for the rest, if they arrested the terrorists behind making the WMD's in Iraq, and if it was on a small scale, then the problem is solved. What good would bombing them do? The whole point of air strikes on Syria, at least from what I've read and heard, is to take out their military installations and airports so the Syrian government can't make WMD's on a large, militarily significant scale, and so that they have no ability to deploy them with missiles or drop them as bombs. We'll destroy the facilities to make the WMD's, and the capability to deliver them on a military scale, whether it's by Assad, or if he's forced out, the rebels.
You either have a reading comprehension problem or you missed a few posts. I never said that the rebels did it. I never said the Assad regime did it. I said several times that it was POSSIBILITY that the rebels did it. When both sides possess chemical weapons - the rebels being the terrorists who are capable of doing the most horrific things as seen on videos (cutting a man's heart out and taking a bite out of it?), I think it's something to consider. I have also said that MOST LIKELY it was the Assad regime. I have also said that the US government did not release any proof it was the Assad regime. Up to now the government has been giving lip service on the issue of proof. I don't support the regime or the rebels - anyone in their right mind wouldn't.
I question the lack of response by the US when France and the UK had proof that chemical weapons were previously used. I question the lies that are coming out of Kerry's mouth. 1,429 dead? Doctors Without Borders reported 355 deaths. Now you have Wasserman claiming that the US is receiving the support of "dozens" of countries, but she can't say what countries because it's "classified". It's so classified that she can't even say if they are willing to give military support. WTH?? I'm sure that there are dozens of countries that give the US moral support, but what about military support?
If the US proceeds, I pray to God that it will be an effective warning and nothing more. I don't think any American wants to see something that resembles another Iraq but you have to keep that possibility open if Syria retaliates in any way.
He's very clever. He's going to look agreeable and diplomatic by going to Congress first then blame Republicans for not going in with him. He'll tout McCain and Lindsey as rational neo-cons like himself and call the rest hypocrites because they are guilty by association as Republicans who supported Bush in Iraq. He'll look presidential by using any executive privilege to circumvent Congress. Leftists will support Obama because, well, he's Obama. They will beat down liberal dissent through Alinsky tactics "Romney wouldn't done the same thing".
Win-win for Obama.
Quote:
Originally Posted by juneaubound
Said the same general thing to someone yesterday. He should have kept his mouth shut, quietly got his ducks in a row, got his strategy down, got whatever approvals he needed, built whatever consensus he wanted, and then just freakin did it.
Not blustered in public, sent his stooges out to do more blustering, publicly get turned down by major international bodies and allies, given Syria time to prepare/threaten retaliation/do their own PR, left Congress home to sit by the pool, and signed in at the club for his golf cart.
He - and we - look like blundering, ball-less, spineless, inept fools.
The amateur hour!
Talk about blowing a strategy.
Putin has subs already aimed at our 5 destroyers.
It will be moments after the first Tomahawk is launched, all hell is going to break loose. Those 5 destroyers will be head down to Davy Jones locker.
Putin has sized Obama up.
I am not in any loop. My posts are strictly my opinions based on various news feeds and pure scuttlebutt. Sorry I insulted you, I sincerely didn't mean to. It's just you make these untrue definitive statements that are so obviously biased and colored by your utter disdain for our president.
Who are you to say my "opinions" are based on lies? Who are you to say that your "opinions" are full of truths and therefore valid? I read the news feeds. I don't have the advantage that you do to rely on scuttlebutt that you don't know if it is true or not or has been embellished. I don't make "statements" I give MY opinion and I generally include "I think" when I express it, I don't say "I know". I guess I need to sugarcoat my opinions so that they don't come across strong so that people won't misread them and interpret them as "fact"?
I do have disdain for him, as I did for Bush. Did you have any disdain for Bush over Iraq? I don't have to like the way Obama has performed as a president, and I'm not alone in that department. That is my opinion, and I am entitled to it, as you are entitled to your opinion and your support of Obama. We don't have to agree.
Who are you to say my "opinions" are based on lies? Who are you to say that your "opinions" are full of truths and therefore valid? I read the news feeds. I don't have the advantage that you do to rely on scuttlebutt that you don't know if it is true or not or has been embellished. I don't make "statements" I give MY opinion and I generally include "I think" when I express it, I don't say "I know". I guess I need to sugarcoat my opinions so that they don't come across strong so that people won't misread them and interpret them as "fact"?
I do have disdain for him, as I did for Bush. Did you have any disdain for Bush over Iraq? I don't have to like the way Obama has performed as a president, and I'm not alone in that department. That is my opinion, and I am entitled to it, as you are entitled to your opinion and your support of Obama. We don't have to agree.
I didn't know that an apology needed a response, especially when that apology is followed by a nice way of calling me a liar.
And thanks for answering my question to you regarding Bush. Oh, wait - you didn't
Got the message. You win.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
