We can all agree on 1 thing!

Dungheap said:
So 56% are against action, then.




Seems to me he brought it to Congress because Congress asked him to. You have a problem with that?
Click to expand...

The poll shows that 56% are against any action at all, the rest want more proof that we're bombing the right guy and that there actually is an American interest for us to take action, only 19% support action now.

The reality is 81% of America does not support this action at this time.
 
Damocles said:
The poll shows that 56% are against any action at all, the rest want more proof that we're bombing the right guy and that there actually is an American interest for us to take action, only 19% support action now.

The reality is 81% of America does not support this action at this time.
Click to expand...


Support for the bold?

And why do you argue this stuff? 19% support action. 56% oppose action. 25% are unsure. That's not 81% against action, it's 56% against action.
 
cawacko said:
Me neither although based on his comment before going to Congress of essentially saying 'I don't need to go to Congress but I will' that had Britain said yes I surmise he would have not have gone to Congress.
Click to expand...

.. and he knew that about the only thing he can be sure of that republicans will agree on is war .. them and Hillary Clinton.
 
Well, I know why you argue this stuff, Damo. What I don't understand is why you make unsupported claims in the first instance.
 
Thing1 said:
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."
Click to expand...

I'd suppot watching Europe take care of this.
 
Beefy said:
These republicans are willing to cross partisan lines when it means using the military. When it means using bombs in a foreign country there they are in lock step with the opposition. Good job to these republicans! Real aisle crossers! War president Obama thanks you for outing him. Kudos to outwitting him and showing his shitbag colors.

http://www.latimes.com/world/worldn...bama-on-syria-strike-20130903,0,6211713.story
Click to expand...

As I said in an earlier thread, I'm sure they will vote for it. Repubs have wanted to go to Syria for ages; the question was whether they hate Obama more than they want to bomb. Apparently not.
 
Darla said:
Honestly, everything on this board is now about the imminent Syrian military action, screwing drunk women, and men bragging about all the women they've screwed, drunk or otherwise, and why those women will never be the same (hahahha).

Now, I admit that the Syrian situation is surely topical, and also very important, but every single thread on it is filled with the same people saying the exact same things.

I know, I know, nothing is stopping me from putting up other threads. I'm too busy though.
Click to expand...

Totally agree!
 
tekkychick said:
As I said in an earlier thread, I'm sure they will vote for it. Repubs have wanted to go to Syria for ages; the question was whether they hate Obama more than they want to bomb. Apparently not.
Click to expand...

LOL, Tekkygal fails again. She should stick to cheerleading from the sidelines when other libs post.

GOP House members say Republicans should support Obama on Syria


110105_cantor_obama_boehner_ap_522_regular_regular.jpg


http://washingtonexaminer.com/gop-house-members-say-republicans-should-support-obama-on-syria/article/2535130
 
Dungheap said:
Support for the bold?

And why do you argue this stuff? 19% support action. 56% oppose action. 25% are unsure. That's not 81% against action, it's 56% against action.
Click to expand...

You pretend that "unsure" means the same thing as "for", I do not. Unsure people are not "for" action. Only 19% are "for" action.
 
tekkychick said:
As I said in an earlier thread, I'm sure they will vote for it. Repubs have wanted to go to Syria for ages; the question was whether they hate Obama more than they want to bomb. Apparently not.
Click to expand...


They saw the intel.


they know what will happen to them in retrospect of this action if they were on record for being against it after seeing the intel we will all be privy to in the future.




some day you people may apologise to me for attacking me when I get it right.
 
Damocles said:
You pretend that "unsure" means the same thing as "for", I do not. Unsure people are not "for" action. Only 19% are "for" action.
Click to expand...

Where is DH pretending that? I see you pretending that "unsure' means against.

The proper way to state things is that 19% support action, 56% oppose and 25% are unsure.

Which is not what you said at all.

Not that any of this matters.
 
evince said:
There are things afoot.


hating your own government because Bush was an asshole wont keep us safe
Click to expand...

Maybe it's just me but I see a difference hate and trust. I don't hate my government. I do have issues with trusting politicians. If I have trouble trusting politicians does automatically mean I hate my government?

Desh you keep referencing Bush. Do you remember LBJ and Gulf of Tonkin? I think there are a lot of good reasons people question politicians of both party's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top