War with Syria

[ryoder 1,590]

Now Obama is trying to rewrite what he said about the "red line". [facepalm]

Aug. 20, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avQKLRGRhPU

Today: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-reserves-right-to-buck-congress-on-syria-strike-140227751.html

Jon Stewart is back this week, so at least he will have some fresh material.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[Gravitymaster 0]

ryoder

Now Obama is trying to rewrite what he said about the "red line". [facepalm]

Aug. 20, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avQKLRGRhPU

Today: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-reserves-right-to-buck-congress-on-syria-strike-140227751.html

Despicable. Seriously!

[normiss 800]

I'm getting pretty fed up with our government's international meddling.
They suck at it.

[turtlespeed 220]

Gravitymaster

***Now Obama is trying to rewrite what he said about the "red line". [facepalm]

Aug. 20, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avQKLRGRhPU

Today: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-reserves-right-to-buck-congress-on-syria-strike-140227751.html

Despicable. Seriously!

Not despicable, but definitely SOP.
It's what he does.
It's how he rolls.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[DanG 1]

Quote

I'm still disgusted that the tripwire has not been the fact of a ruler's mass-murder of his own people while (successfully!) hiding behind the abstract shield of "national sovereignty", but merely the mode of weaponry. The implicit message it sends to other current and future despots is beyond appalling.

But what bright line can you draw? When the body count gets to 10,000? How about 1,000? or 100? And who decides when a killing is "justified" or not? There's no bright line to cross.

Chemical weapons use is a bright line. Assad can't hide behind the lie that he's just targeting "terrorists". NBC weapons are, by their nature, different than conventional weapons. Their use is rightly considered a crime against humanity.

- Dan G

[turtlespeed 220]

normiss

I'm getting pretty fed up with our government's international meddling.
They suck at it.

You should see what they are trying to do to our medical industry.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billvon 2,991]

>Now Obama is trying to rewrite what he said about the "red line".

Good. Less inflammatory rhetoric will be good for the situation overall.

[turtlespeed 220]

billvon

>Now Obama is trying to rewrite what he said about the "red line".

Good. Less inflammatory rhetoric will be good for the situation overall.

LOL - Back tracking is good mmmkayyy.

"I was for it before I was against it", after all "what difference does it really make?"

Anyone see a pattern here?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[normiss 800]

Odd how we hated it when Hillary tried it.

[billvon 2,991]

>LOL - Back tracking is good

Hell yes. 4000 US soldiers and 100,000 innocent Iraqis would be alive today if Bush had backtracked on Iraq. If Obama backtracks and it avoids another war? Not just good, excellent.

[normiss 800]

I was under the impression the numbers were double that.
200k killed, half of them children.



It's deja vu all over again.

[rushmc 23]

quade

The problem there, Andy, is internationally you have to allow for civil wars to take place. The US and other governments can't take sides on strictly internal civil wars.

The use of NBC weapons is different. Vastly different.

I agree but, there is one big problem, and this is, it is not clear which side deployed them

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jclalor 12]

billvon

>LOL - Back tracking is good

Hell yes. 4000 US soldiers and 100,000 innocent Iraqis would be alive today if Bush had backtracked on Iraq. If Obama backtracks and it avoids another war? Not just good, excellent.

Correction: 100,081

13 bombs went off in Baghdad today.

[rushmc 23]

Again, we are not sure which side used them

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

quade

***Putin has made it clear how Russia would vote.

You sound pretty confident, but are you certain you're up-to-date on his feelings?

Quote

Putin says Russia could support strike on Syria

MOSCOW -- Russian President Vladimir Putin said he has not ruled out backing a U.S.-led military operation in Syria if the Kremlin gets concrete proof than an alleged chemical attack on civilians was committed by Bashar Assad’s government.

“I don’t rule this out,” Putin said during a televised interview with First Channel, a Russian federal television network, and the Associated Press. “But I want to draw your attention to one absolutely principled issue: In accordance with the current international law, a sanction to use arms against a sovereign state can be given only by the U.N. Security Council.”

This resembles when Bush said that he'd consider signing an extension of the AWB if presented to him. Knowing full well that a GOP Congress would never pass such a bill. Putin says that if he sees proof HE considers concrete, he may back action. This is the same guy that denies the Russian government discriminates violently against gays, and as Jon Stewart often says, is a real life Bond super villain.

No, as Lawrocket says, the fair presumption is that Russia would veto any Security Council motion against Syria. To believe otherwise is to speculate.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

rushmc

Again, we are not sure which side used them

Who is "we"? You and GM?... LOL.

[regulator 0]

Andy9o8

***Why is that a surprise?
We ignored it when Saddam did it.

Worse - apparently we facilitated it - by giving Iraq valuable tactical intelligence about Iran. But that's ok, because it was the enemy of our enemy.

[normiss 800]

Not quite.

Saddam had OUR weapons.
Syria appears to have Saudi weapons.

Hanoi didn't start that fight either, but it didn't stop us from getting involved in that particular event either.

Dammit this is getting old.

[jclalor 12]

regulator

******Why is that a surprise?
We ignored it when Saddam did it.

Worse - apparently we facilitated it - by giving Iraq valuable tactical intelligence about Iran. But that's ok, because it was the enemy of our enemy.

Are you talking shit about St. Ronald ?

[billvon 2,991]

Wrong war.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Syria appears to have Saudi weapons.

If you mean to say "Syria" has our weapons, you must mean the Syrian rebels. The Saudi Government has been funding the Syrian rebels for a couple of years. Some have even claimed Saudi Arabia provided Chemical weapons for the recent attack.

[normiss 800]

You missed the part where our gooberment says the Syrian gooberment used the chemical weapons.



No biggie, we'll just missile and drone strike a few more million humans to death.
Guaranteed to make improvements in the region.
Look at the history of the US improving other nations via this method.
Works fine every time.

[grue 1]

RobertMBlevins

Do you think people, once they get into power no mattter where they are, are justified in killing their own citizens in such a shit way? Imagine if OUR President ordered such a thing due to protest or whatever. You can't. It's unimaginable because this is America and we don't do that against our own citizens. We may not be perfect, but we do live under the rule of law. We don't simply execute our own people using poison gas when there is a problem with the government. There are avenues. There are rules. There is JUSTICE. There is not gassing.

Yeah if you're gonna kill your own citizens, only drones are acceptable.

cavete terrae.

[Channman 2]

normiss

How many innocent children have been murdered by US drones?
Why aren't we bombing the people responsible for those illegal killings????

I believe Obama has been the primary one for directing drone strikes. To direct bombings and or drones on Obama might be considered illegal and quite possible interrupt his gulf game.

[billvon 2,991]

>To direct bombings and or drones on Obama might be considered illegal

Probably, there's that law against assassinating the President.

>and quite possible interrupt his gulf game.

I think of Syria as more Middle Eastern than Gulf.