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.
Assad would not have use chemicals in the first place. America would still be respected.
Well, of course. Magically, Assad would be a straight-up guy that didn't kill his own people. Must be that magic underwear again. It must work like Karl Rove's Republican Math.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
"The right" did not want Romney, he was the candidate the establishment Republicans chose.
And YET - he was the Republican candidate for President. The one that the Republican party chose to represent them. The one that made it through the gauntlet of primaries. The ONE, according to the poster above, that would have cause Assad to magically become a great leader.
He would have done whatever he was told to do. It amazes me that people in the states still place their faith in the government. The stuff you watch on tv and read in the newspapers is just a huge drama show.
Here is a simple solution.
Stop voting!!!
Voting gives the illusion of choice.
Eliminate this illusion. America is the biggest social engineering scheme ever. Don't play their game.
He would be doing what we are doing now. The only difference would be that the GOP would be making every argument possible to support it, and probably many Dems to oppose it.
Can it be any more clear that Republican opposition to limited strikes in Syria is based on nothing more than political opportunism? They were all for this a year ago and now have only changed their mind simply because Obama is now for it. Dishonesty and double talk is the hallmark of the modern Republican Party. It's nice to see at least one conservative publication is still honest enough to admit it.
I think a lot of what Romoney would have done would have depended on his choice for secretary and his inner circle of advisers.
I don't think everyone is totally sold on making Assad pay for what he did to his people.
I saw the videos of people suffering from being attacked by chemical weapons, but nobody has come forth with conclusive proof that Assad's army did those attacks. Although we do know his regime is brutal. But, so was Saddam Hussein who killed people with chem-bio weapons and all we did was sit and watch, as did the world.
1. He would have better relations with russia and such be in a better position to put pressure on them to reign in syria.
2. He would have attacked iran by now and blown up their nuke capabilities. With a weak iran we dont have a situation in syria right now.
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.
On Syria, what would Romney have done?
