I'm an Army vet (2001-2008) and just glad that it looks like we'll be staying out of this one!
I'm an Army vet (2001-2008) and just glad that it looks like we'll be staying out of this one!
I'm an Army vet (2001-2008) and just glad that it looks like we'll be staying out of this one!
liberal war party.Yeah, there's just a touch of truth in this:
I respect the fact that you are thinking more deeply about all this than the typical rabble no-minds on this forum. However, I disagree with most of it. I sure don't disagree that the gas use was by the terrorists and I think that the US intelligence agencies couldn't be unaware of that. The rest of your post, I won't get into details on what I agree with and disagree with for now.
You do raise some plausible possibilities.
edit: Oh, and I find it an interesting idea that Putin and Assad would want to help Obama save face. That could only be possible if they think Obama is their best chance to prevent war.
Republicans are in a state of metamorphosis.
Antiwar/isolationist/libertarians are taking root there ... and I think they would be against this if a republican was proposing it.
They don't like people like John McCain and the warhawk bunch.
I wouldn't so much call it isolationism as I would call it a more centralized focus. Is there a valid reason for us to be in Syria? What is the compelling interest to the US? Before the questions were asked Obama was ready to flow on in there because he called "Red Line" and that's clearly an International Legal Term for "we get to blow you up" or can also be interpreted to mean "all your base are belong to us".
Anyway, yeah. I think that most of us would still be against this if it were a republican who proposed it, in fact McCain's been begging for it for the past 2 years.
You make my point .. better than I did. :0)
Unbeknownst to the casual eye, the Republican Party is indeed morphing.
Although the question remains, will they morph away from the social issues that keep them separated from mainstream society?
Thank you for fairness. In 1999-2000 Bush truly was addressing domestic issues, he really wanted to work at 'home' and not on interventions. As I said, 9 months in, after horrible transition, 9/11 happened, so we'll never know. But there are indications when one looks at AIDS, his immigration stands, (whether or not I agreed with him, isn't the point), even the very misguided "No Child Left Behind." I don't think he got the presidency he thought he would, then again, which of them does?
Welcome and thnk you for your service.
They say that now. If you disagree with 'em, they'll claim you have PTSD and trash you.
I hope you are correct, that would be a monumental shift in the political balance.
from the guy who calls Kerry names for winning a silver star
I called Cap'n Swiftboat names for winning a Silver Star? When?
than thank Obama for it.
instead you want to blame him.
would assad give them up if it was passed as Obamas idea?
No
When you changed his name from Kerry to Cap'n Swiftboat.