yes on the syrian resolution says the congressional peeps

tekkychick said:
Well, so is Assad. And so are the rebels.

If you go by that criteria, there's no one you like...
Click to expand...
ya, but. They were murdering each other without our involvement.

Much respect , but why do we alone need to do this? Without UN approval/or even NATO/ or the fact is isn't really in our best national interest to get in there?

US Officials: US Considers Training Syria Rebels
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/officials-us-considers-training-syria-rebels-20171695

The Obama administration is considering a plan to use U.S. military trainers to help increase the capabilities of the Syrian rebels, in a move
that would greatly expand the current CIA training being done quietly in Jordan, U.S. officials told The Associated Press on Thursday.

Any training would take place outside Syria, and one possible location would be Jordan.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
if there is no one we like is it in our best interests to act on behalf of either?....
Click to expand...

No.


That doesn't mean there aren't a whole lot of people caught between, indeed, these are the ones purposefully put in harms way. Those we will kill if we 'save them.'
 
As the great Jewish rapper said!
All my life I been waitin' for
I been prayin' for, for the people to say
That we don't want to fight no more
They'll be no more wars and our children will play

One day, one day, one day
One day, one day, one day

: Matisyahu -
 
Annie said:
No.


That doesn't mean there aren't a whole lot of people caught between, indeed, these are the ones purposefully put in harms way. Those we will kill if we 'save them.'
Click to expand...
Hobson's Choice comes to mind......if not the exact term
 
evince said:
when you bomb military sites to destroy equipment you are not bombing children.
Click to expand...

Right, because it isn't like Assad watches the news or anything and could possibly move his equipment to civilian sites right? I mean, he wouldn't stoop so low as to do that now would he? Nobody in the history of civilian warfare has ever done anything so dastardly have they?

In fact, I bet these sites will have BIG targets on them saying "OBOMBA ME!!!".

Yeah, you are such the military strategist sitting there in your granny panties tap tap tapping away on a computer when you have no idea what in the fuck you are talking about.
 
The Dude said:
As the great Jewish rapper said!
All my life I been waitin' for
I been prayin' for, for the people to say
That we don't want to fight no more
They'll be no more wars and our children will play

One day, one day, one day
One day, one day, one day

: Matisyahu -
Click to expand...

Obama thought he fit that. He was wrong.
 
Annie said:
yet, no one is acknowledging that many that were for Iraq or Afghanistan, recognized in realistic terms what a change in administration would mean. Truth is, Obama basically pulled a 'immediate pull out in Iraq," granted because of the intransigent politicians in Iraq, but that move changed probable success to likely failure.

Afghanistan is a different kettle of fish, which seemed to be recognized by the idiot Bush, not so much by Obama. How's that worked out? Then there's Libya. How's that worked out for us or them? Notice I put us first?

Now we're all such ijits to go, 'Hell yes, let's keep this up, working so well!" No.
Click to expand...

This is like, the danger of getting yourself too much into an anti-Obama tizzy. You could actually get stupid enough to thank this post. This post is nearly incoherent first of all. Are you taking writing lessons from your friend Ice, Annie? I thought you were a teacher? But from what I can discern after reading it three times, you are actually claiming that the IRaq war was a probable sucess (under bush of course), but it's Obama's fault for turning it into a "likely failure' by "pulling an immediate pull out in IRaq"??

First off, permit me to laugh at the ludicrous idea that the Iraq war was ever a "probable success". Now that I am done with that, let me inform you of a little fact Annie....Obama actually pulled out of Iraq under a timetable negotiated and agreed to by Bush.

So really what the hell kind of horseshit are you peddling here? This is a great example of why I never let myself get led quite that far down the path. I know all of you republicans are full of shit, and I don't stand with you. You are not against war, you are the other side of the desh coin. You're against a democratic war.

What's amazing is that you got away with posting this bullshit. Only because DH wasn't around I presume. Well I am not as sharp as he is, but I am sharp enough to laugh my ass off at this load of shit.

I love your first sentence! A great, albeit, incoherent explanation for why you bushwarmongers were for his wars but against any democratic ones. Because you geniuses "recognized" in realistic terms what a change in adminstration would mean. LMAO. Yeah, you guys are way ahead of your time on that. And you sure have the rest of us outsmarted. Hilarious.

Also, Annata, Dh is not a "neocon warhawk".
 
Darla said:
This is like, the danger of getting yourself too much into an anti-Obama tizzy. You could actually get stupid enough to thank this post. This post is nearly incoherent first of all. Are you taking writing lessons from your friend Ice, Annie? I thought you were a teacher? But from what I can discern after reading it three times, you are actually claiming that the IRaq war was a probable sucess (under bush of course), but it's Obama's fault for turning it into a "likely failure' by "pulling an immediate pull out in IRaq"??

First off, permit me to laugh at the ludicrous idea that the Iraq war was ever a "probable success". Now that I am done with that, let me inform you of a little fact Annie....Obama actually pulled out of Iraq under a timetable negotiated and agreed to by Bush.

So really what the hell kind of horseshit are you peddling here? This is a great example of why I never let myself get led quite that far down the path. I know all of you republicans are full of shit, and I don't stand with you. You are not against war, you are the other side of the desh coin. You're against a democratic war.

What's amazing is that you got away with posting this bullshit. Only because DH wasn't around I presume. Well I am not as sharp as he is, but I am sharp enough to laugh my ass off at this load of shit.

I love your first sentence! A great, albeit, incoherent explanation for why you bushwarmongers were for his wars but against any democratic ones. Because you geniuses "recognized" in realistic terms what a change in adminstration would mean. LMAO. Yeah, you guys are way ahead of your time on that. And you sure have the rest of us outsmarted. Hilarious.

Also, Annata, Dh is not a "neocon warhawk".
Click to expand...
there is some idea that staying i Iraq would have stabilized Iraq; not my particular idea, b ut considering the fracturizations, it is an idea.

The same idea is being floated/ happening by Obama in Afganistan. Keeping bases. I don't think it has merit - neither idea, but it is arguable -hell we got bases all over the world.

Also, Annata, Dh is not a "neocon warhawk
Click to expand...
who/what is Dh??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top