Home › Forums › Open Discussion › Really? The pawn in another Middle East conflict? Are we Syria's this time?
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 2, 2013 at 8:02 pm #796876
dobroParticipant“Be a man (is that PC?) and make a decision.”
PC? Well, what is he, if not a man? Boy? I don’t think you want to go there. Girl? Woman? As if females can’t make decisions? So your command is meaningless really.
Make a decision? Obama made a decision, one that I agree with, to consult the elected represenatives of the American people before commiting to an act of war. A decision I wish several of our previous POTUSs would have made.
September 2, 2013 at 9:32 pm #796877
JoBParticipantsmitty
i forgot about the d…d pipeline.
no lack of understanding now about who wants us to fly in and protect it..
September 2, 2013 at 10:36 pm #796878
JanSParticipantdobro…you and I both know that if Obama had just gone ahead and done it, he’d now be taking a lot of heat for it…damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t. It’s Congress’ job to handle this, per the constitution – I don’t care what Bush did before him – look where that got us.
I agree with his decision, too…
September 2, 2013 at 10:39 pm #796879
JKBParticipantThe problem with hitting Syria is that we’re not willing to go far enough. The military isn’t subtle – it’s the means of achieving an end by force. It’s effective, just not delicate.
So ‘hitting’ a country really ought to mean ‘overrunning the place and occupying it until it behaves’. If that doesn’t seem right, then we should stay with diplomatic/economic approaches.
September 2, 2013 at 11:06 pm #796880
SmittyParticipant“I don’t care what Bush did before him – look where that got us.”
Jan, Bush received congressional approval to attack Iraq. Maybe you are confusing him with Clinton and Kosovo?
September 3, 2013 at 12:17 am #796881
dobroParticipant“Bush received congressional approval to attack Iraq.”
Indeed he did. He used a pack of lies and liars to do so, but you’re correct, he did get the AUMF from Congress. So what’s the problem with Obama seeking congressional approval before attacking Syria? Do you think Bush was less of a “man” for seeking approval?
September 3, 2013 at 1:33 am #796882
JanSParticipantSmitty…where did I say he didn’t get approval. What I said was “I don’t care what he did” Yes, he did get approval…and he lied..so I would say what I care about is the falsehoods told by Bush that got a lot of our young men and women killed and maimed for no good reason. Cheney must be salivating right about now, hoping to make more millions on this little fray. Wish they’d just say no to Blackwater, and it’s mercenaries…
September 3, 2013 at 4:19 pm #796883
miwsParticipantHere’s one republican’s solution to the crisis in Syria…..
September 3, 2013 at 8:13 pm #796884
BostonmanMemberI am a republican who believes he should get congressional approval to start a war. No one has declared war with the United States so go to Congress and let them decide, good or bad.
The biggest problem we have nowadays with going to war is we try to be so PC about it. If we vote to go to war then you should be voting to completely destroy the government of said country. Collateral damage will happen but you invade it, occupy it and take no prisoners. As far as how difficult it would be I will leave that to our military strategists who are some of the best in the world.
September 4, 2013 at 12:42 am #796885
JanSParticipantso…a meeting today about Syria…3+ hours…and this is how some attendees spend the time :
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/09/03/mccain-caught-playing-poker-on-his-phone-during-syria-hearing/
I’d like to see this taken a little more seriously :(
September 4, 2013 at 12:57 am #796886
Wes C. AddleParticipantI have a good friend who’s family is from Syria. She insists that Assad is not using chemical weapons. She blames everything on the rebels. It’s interesting to hear her side of things and not what we’re fed my mainstream media.
September 4, 2013 at 2:38 am #796887
JanSParticipanttherein lies a problem….Assad backers in Syria say the rebels did it…the rebels say not so, Assad did it…
September 4, 2013 at 3:16 am #796888
EdSaneParticipantThe Rebels don’t have the capability to create, store or launch Sarin Gas. Assad does.
September 4, 2013 at 3:30 pm #796889
JoBParticipantSeptember 4, 2013 at 7:06 pm #796890
wakefloodParticipantAs usual, John Cleese has an irreverent take on Syria from the European perspective:
“The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent events in Syria and have therefore raised their security level from “Miffed” to “Peeved.” Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to “Irritated” or even “A Bit Cross.” The English have not been “A Bit Cross” since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies nearly ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorized from “Tiresome” to “A Bloody Nuisance.” The last time the British issued a “Bloody Nuisance” warning level was in 1588, when threatened by the Spanish Armada.
The Scots have raised their threat level from “Pissed Off” to “Let’s get the Bastards.” They don’t have any other levels. This is the reason they have been used on the front line of the British army for the last 300 years.
The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from “Run” to “Hide.” The only two higher levels in France are “Collaborate” and “Surrender.” The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France ‘s white flag factory, effectively paralysing the country’s military capability.
Italy has increased the alert level from “Shout Loudly and Excitedly” to “Elaborate Military Posturing.” Two more levels remain: “Ineffective Combat Operations” and “Change Sides.”
The Germans have increased their alert state from “Disdainful Arrogance” to “Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs.” They also have two higher levels: “Invade a Neighbour” and “Lose.”
Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual; the only threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels.
The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.
Australia, meanwhile, has raised its security level from “No worries” to “She’ll be alright, Mate.” Two more escalation levels remain: “Crikey! I think we’ll need to cancel the barbie this weekend!” and “The barbie is cancelled.” So far no situation has ever warranted use of the last final escalation level.
September 4, 2013 at 7:13 pm #796891
JanSParticipantwakeflood…hilarious!!
September 4, 2013 at 9:55 pm #796892
JoBParticipantcrikey.. we may have to cancel the barbie
September 4, 2013 at 11:30 pm #796893
miwsParticipantSeptember 5, 2013 at 1:15 am #796894
BreezyParticipantwakeflood…thank you for a very hearty laugh!!!
September 5, 2013 at 4:01 am #796895
PLSParticipantActually there is significant evidence that the rebels gained access to both the chemicals and the delivery mechanisms used after several bases known to stockpile these were overrun. Add to that no particular link directly from any attack orders to the Syrian leadership if they did indeed fire upon the civilians and the fact that any action we take short of all out invasion will have little to no serious impact on things and it is simply a losing proposition to strike. I hate that it happened and that it might again but I’m unwilling to put even a single patriot missile at risk without concrete evidence. It is all just hubris without that.
September 5, 2013 at 3:14 pm #796896
wakefloodParticipantMy whole concern on this is what exactly is the plan here? What’s the end game? Is this “drop a few smart bombs/cruise missiles” and call it a day or is it “massive air strikes followed by boots on the ground”, or what??
Is this about removing Assad or attempting to push him back into a defensive posture or just make some public show of “we won’t stand for chemical weapons use!”?
I might be in favor of something on the lower end of that scale but I’d need to know what that actually means. Proportional response, as they call it? Reminds me of the early West Wing episode where Jed Bartlett gets all crumped about dropping a bomb on a janitor working the night shift in the Libyan command building – as the “proportional response” suggested by the military.
September 5, 2013 at 11:17 pm #796897
JanSParticipantfor those interested, I got this email today:
“
Dear Friends,
In the past week, I have received hundreds of calls from constituents about a possible military action in Syria. It’s a serious issue that deserves a public debate, and while I have heard from President Obama and his national security team, I need to hear from you. I will be asked to vote on this issue as your Representative and I want to give you the chance to voice your opinions in person.
I will be hosting a listening session this Sunday to hear your thoughts and concerns regarding the current situation in Syria. Please join me.
Listening Session on Our Options in Syria
Sunday, September 8
7:00 pm
University Temple United Methodist Church
1415 NE 43rd St, Seattle, 98105
Map It!
Please RSVP to my District Office or on my Facebook page.
District Office: (206) 553-7170
Facebook Event
Sincerely,
Congressman Jim McDermott
PS – If you’d like to stay up to date on what I’m doing in Washington or in DC, sign up for my e-newsletter, find me on Facebook, or follow me on Twitter!”
September 6, 2013 at 12:47 am #796898
anonymeParticipantLet’s not forget that both Reagan and his successor supplied materials for both chemical and biological weapons to Saddam Hussein in support of Iraq’s war with Iran. America is not coming to the table with clean hands on this issue, and the more I read, the less I’m convinced by the evidence – or lack thereof. There’s more to this.
September 6, 2013 at 3:17 am #796899
EdSaneParticipant@PLS, no plausible proof thus far has shown that they (the Rebels), possess or have the ability to launch such weapons. There is a certain level of knowledge/sophistication needed to use these weapons which the Rebels do not have. At this time it’s quite clear Assad’s regime was behind this. Whether he gave the order or not is unknowable… (personally I’m all for limited US strikes regardless of chemical weapons). Isolationism isn’t the answer in a global world.
September 6, 2013 at 3:38 pm #796900
PLSParticipantFrom Stephen Colbert:
“The United States has no choice but to attack Syria because dictator Bachar Assad is killing his own people with chemical weapons. Before he was just killing them with bullets, but if America cared about shooting people we would be invading Chicago.”
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.