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.
Personally, I don't mind a socialist tyrant getting bombs dropped on his head.
Assad leads the Syrian Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party, just as Saddam Hussein led the Socialist Ba'ath Party in Iraq. Assad is a murderous dictator just like Saddam (except he hasn't killed as many people as Saddam). The Assad dynasty invaded neighboring Lebanon but removed their troops in 2005 (officially). Assad supports international terrorism - Hezbollah. Assad admits possessing chemical weapons stockpiles and is thought to have chemical weapons production capability. IMO it is unclear whether or not Assad has used the weapons. Syria is part of the Axis of Evil along with Iran and North Korea.
IMO there is justification for removing Assad from power, just as there was justification for removing Saddam from power.
George W. Bush got bi-partisan Congressional approval, UN sanction, and gathered a coalition of more than 40 countries to wage war on Saddam.
Feckless Democrats later protested the Iraq War (after authorizing the war). George Bush's biggest mistake was that he expected Democrats to behave in the national interest.
Obama* is asking for Congressional approval although the Obama administration says it can strike Syria with or without Congressional approval. Obama tried and failed to get UN sanction for a strike on Syria. Obama has gathered a coalition of the Army of One. This must be the 'Smart Diplomacy' we were promised...
I have no confidence in the Obama administration's ability to wage war on Syria and let me be clear, dropping bombs on another country is war.
The issue is what's next after he does it? Is there any kind of plan as to what comes next?
He's only asking Congress because if they say "no" he can blame them and if they say "yes" he can share the blame. All I can say is those idiots better not develop the plan for him.
And Congress, who is supposed to represent the people apparently don't care what the people say.
The issue is what's next after he does it? Is there any kind of plan as to what comes next?
He's only asking Congress because if they say "no" he can blame them and if they say "yes" he can share the blame. All I can say is those idiots better not develop the plan for him.
And Congress, who is supposed to represent the people apparently don't care what the people say.
He's asking congress because there's much more at stake than just lobbing a few missliles at some concrete. Not to deflect praise or blame. If you say how the heads of the various political factions like Cantor and Boehner came out of the confidential intelligence briefings and made statements of immediate support, you'd realize this.
Let the strike happen...support in Congress is growing (even though the voters being represented most likely would vote against the action)...let it happen and see how long it takes for boots to hit the ground either in Syria or another country when the counter strike happens.
The latest polls show growing support..now 33% are ok with us invading Syria.
Kerry just needs to do some more tap dancing on TV so we can get those poll numbers up past 50%.
Why do you constantly use the term "invade"? The US has no intention of invading. We don't need to invade. We have the Free Syrian Army already in-country.
The casual way in which some Americans view war is likely due to their Hollywood image of war, coupled with having no first hand experience of the horrors of war, and the misery it inflicts on so many innocents. Americans have been spoiled by the fact that we have not had to suffer the ravages of war on our home soil.
Because of this, we have developed a very unhealthy and childlike mentality shaped by propaganda, and look upon war as a form of entertainment .. as sick as that sounds. I mean, look at the Iraqi invasion, if you doubt this .... look at the coverage of the opening of the war on CNN .... "Breaking News .... from our correspondents broadcasting live in the theater of operations ... Gulf War II ... Shock & Awe over Baghdad, Iraq". (as the fancy graphics and music fill the screen .... Americans gather around the television, pass the popcorn ... look at the bombs exploding!!! It's like the 4th of July ... Cool!)
because somebody is very interested in reducing the world's population. And if China will to fight-that he will perform these tasks. Just, the Iranian leader is not aware that feeds the who in the future can devour his country. China near Iran. The United States far. But he sees a threat in the United States. Or he thinks that China will forever be at peace with Iran? So it is the proof that the world war in the middle East not need U.S. or Iran. A third side( not even China). Everyone knows this side... So in developed countries and advocated gay, depression, loans,abortion( cause of too much sex ) and in totalitarian - idolatry, nationalism, spectacle, paedophilia,agression( cause too less sex), communism( the faceless mass )- to reduce the population and take control of it. But a lot of resources on the planet is enough for all. The question is that some countries do not use their advantages-therefore, there is war and conflict.
The issue is what's next after he does it? Is there any kind of plan as to what comes next?
He's only asking Congress because if they say "no" he can blame them and if they say "yes" he can share the blame. All I can say is those idiots better not develop the plan for him.
And Congress, who is supposed to represent the people apparently don't care what the people say.
From some of Cantor's statements after meeting with the president, I think they do intend to help develop the plan. As they should. This is going to be a bipartisan effort, which I know sticks in the craw of many on the right who would like to see the president go it alone. Your elected officials don't agree.
The point is to give AQ the advanage to take over.
They were losing against Assad.
Our bombing did it in Libya.
No it's not to give AQ the advantage. That's your agenda to pin a tail on the Obama donkey. The point is to give the Free Syrian Army supported by the Saudis an advantage to take over. there are no AQ on the front lines in this war. After the FSA take over an area the AQ are occupying the rear. The Free Syrian army and the Saudis will take care of the AQ.
AQ does not nor have they ever taken control in Libya. They operate in small units in remote parts of the Libyan desert.
Why does the US want to invade Syria, because it claims the Syrian government used bio gas on its citizens, which violates international law.
Can the US strike the US without approval from the UN Security Council? No it can't because that will violate international law -The use of force is lawful only when in exercise of self-defence in accordance with article 51 of the United Nations Charter and or when the Security Council approves such action. Either China or Russia or both will most likely veto.
Let's wait and see how the US government solves that dilemma.
It is so funny that in 2013, the US still thinks it is its duty to meddle with another country's internal business. Maybe it is time to let the US know that it is not in charge any more...
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.
No it's not to give AQ the advantage. That's your agenda to pin a tail on the Obama donkey. The point is to give the Free Syrian Army supported by the Saudis an advantage to take over. there are no AQ on the front lines in this war. After the FSA take over an area the AQ are occupying the rear. The Free Syrian army and the Saudis will take care of the AQ.