Like Saddam Hussein? I thought you opposed the war?
But a Republican was C in C then, so that makes all the difference to you.
We can all agree on 1 thing!
- Thread starter Beefy
- Start date
Like Saddam Hussein? I thought you opposed the war?
But a Republican was C in C then, so that makes all the difference to you.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Feel free to facetious me any time you choose. :0)
So do you care about children being gassed, or don't you?
Saddam gassed children, Assad gassed children (according to you).
Why do you only pretend to care when a Democrat infests the Oval Office?
Why, Desh?
The reality is the "evidence" is as shaky as it was with Iraq, but Desh supports action this time because the President wears the same political jersey and she is nothing if not a team player.
The last poll shows that even most Democrats are against this action, but Desh just can't deny Lord Obama anything.
The last poll shows that even most Democrats are against this action, but Desh just can't deny Lord Obama anything.
None. I've never "hated" on you Desh, I have only pointed out your own hypocrisy. "You people" who are willing to support any action because of political party sicken me. I was against war in Iraq, for a while we agreed. But the jerseys changed color and Desh cannot abide even realistic criticism of "her" quarterback.
evince
Truthmatters
Damo this is the same fucking thing you guys did when Clinton tried to kill OBL.
Your side puts your failed ideas over this countries best interest
Even Obama has only "high probability" that it was Assad's government. In the US we don't convict on "high probability". What will you do if you find out that the gas was disbursed by the rebels?
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
I actually don't think the evidence is that shaky.
I'd support doing something if I thought that the "something" would make a difference or stop/stem what is happening. But that's where they're losing me - I just don't see what they are hoping to accomplish. The best explanation I've heard is that they want to "send a message."
It's not good enough. If you're going to involve our military, the definition has to be clear, the goals & objectives have to be specific.
maineman
Banned
there is a little thing about timing, though, isn't there. Saddam gassed the kurds DECADES before we invaded.
Sort of like when your son spills the milk, and you wait until he's graduated from college and has kids of his own and THEN you spank him.
Utter nonsense, Clinton bombed a aspirin company to distract from his perjury. It isn't even close to the same thing. 91% of America is against action, but Desh can't stop herself from loving on killing her some brown people because Obama is a democrat. Your hypocrisy is showing, maybe you should zip up his pants and think with your brain.
Where the evidence is shaky is in the "who", Onceler.
There is also the problem of actual compelling interest. What would our goal be in "limited targeted attacks" and who is our "enemy"? What exactly will victory look like in Syria? How much will you still support it when Iran enters the fray and the "limited targeted attacks" become a war?