Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on September 01, 2013, 12:23:51 AM
-
Now, before everyone attacks me instead of answering the Q, let me be very clear - we should close OUR borders, bring most troops home, spend the military budget on alternative energy sources, and let everyone on that side of earth blow each other up over oil nobody suddenly wants. that being said...
What happens if Obama WANTS to attack Syria... and Repubs do not...
Do repubs vote AGAINST the war - and then what happens if 1000, 2000,
Or 20,000. Or 50,000. Or 500,000. What happens when ONE MILLION people are killed with chemical weapons? could this come back to bite repubs who are now suddenly very soft on an oil-important nation, who HAVE and are USING these WMD?
Or, what happens is Assad starts selling his WMD or using it on his neighbors in the region. Would dems, in 2014, tell voters "We tried to stop this, but the repubs didn't want to stop this".
IMO, repubs run a big political risk, and I think they might actually get ON BOARD with bombing any nation that uses WMD like Syria did. imagine if some syrian idiot opens a suitcase of WMD on US soil... guess what repubs, you prevented Obama from stopping that bad guy - true or false, that becomes the narrative.
So yes, I think IF it comes to a vote, repubs will get on board with bombing syria for fear of another attack that they could have stoppped.
-
Now, before everyone attacks me instead of answering the Q, let me be very clear - we should close OUR borders, bring most troops home, spend the military budget on alternative energy sources, and let everyone on that side of earth blow each other up over oil nobody suddenly wants. that being said...
What happens if Obama WANTS to attack Syria... and Repubs do not...
Do repubs vote AGAINST the war - and then what happens if 1000, 2000,
Or 20,000. Or 50,000. Or 500,000. What happens when ONE MILLION people are killed with chemical weapons? could this come back to bite repubs who are now suddenly very soft on an oil-important nation, who HAVE and are USING these WMD?
Or, what happens is Assad starts selling his WMD or using it on his neighbors in the region. Would dems, in 2014, tell voters "We tried to stop this, but the repubs didn't want to stop this".
IMO, repubs run a big political risk, and I think they might actually get ON BOARD with bombing any nation that uses WMD like Syria did. imagine if some syrian idiot opens a suitcase of WMD on US soil... guess what repubs, you prevented Obama from stopping that bad guy - true or false, that becomes the narrative.
So yes, I think IF it comes to a vote, repubs will get on board with bombing syria for fear of another attack that they could have stoppped.
Actually Syria has no oil.....however, I think the Repubs are held hostage to their Libertarian and Tea Party wings and although I think they will approve, it night prove difficult and it will be made into an issue in the midterm elections......any Repub who sides with Obama on ANYTHING will be subject to a primary challenge......all Repubs know this
-
::) ::) to both you retards
-
Actually Syria has no oil.....however, I think the Repubs are held hostage to their Libertarian and Tea Party wings and although I think they will approve, it night prove difficult and it will be made into an issue in the midterm elections......any Repub who sides with Obama on ANYTHING will be subject to a primary challenge......all Repubs know this
indeed Syria has little oil but it does have important oil pipelines from other countries- otherwise why such wailing and gnashing of teeth by the UK USA and France at the moment? The USA was almost proactive towards Iraq when it was using Gas against the Iranians. A US foreign policy based on its enemies enemise being its friends is a fickle and unreliable policy
-
::) ::) to both you retards
answer the Q, tony. Will the repubs REALLY vote NO on an act to drop bombs on Syria?
I dont think they can. I think they'll add stuff to it and call it a "blanket safety act for the region", but it'll essentially be bombing shit outta targets inside syria.
consider mccain, graham, and their usual boatload of repubs that love war. Then consider obama saying "Do you want to see these syrian chemical weapons used on american soil?"
I think republicans would crack if they have to vote - and obama would get his war bill.
Tony, what do you think?
-
::) ::) to both you retards
where's the retardedness???????...you are so locked into disagreeing with us all the time you go out of your way not to agree with us.....this is why you often lose credibility
-
any Repub who sides with Obama on ANYTHING will be subject to a primary challenge......all Repubs know this
where's the retardedness???????...you are so locked into disagreeing with us all the time you go out of your way not to agree with us.....this is why you often lose credibility
my credibility among those who have no credibility is of no concern to me, you and 240 are the bottom of the barrell around here in terms of their credibility...while I understand this is probably news to you, it only serves to highlight my point
-
U.S. Military Action Against Syria ‘Going to Happen’ Even If Congress Votes Against It...
The Blaze ^ | 31 August, 2013 | Dave Urbanski
Posted on September 1, 2013 12:57:44 AM EDT by Errant
President Obama will carry out military action against Syria even if Congress votes against it, a senior State Department official tells Fox News’ Chief Washington Correspondent James Rosen.
Rosen’s notes concerning the White House’s reported intentions regarding the Syrian crisis were posted on Fox News colleague Greta Van Susteren’s Gretawire site late Saturday afternoon.
Rosen reports that “the president’s decision to seek a congressional debate and vote was a surprise to most if not all of” his national security team members. The state department official who communicated with Rosen added that Obama’s move to seek congressional approval “did not supplant the president’s earlier decision to use force in Syria, only delayed its implementation.”
“That’s going to happen, anyway,” the source told Rosen, which is why Obama’s Rose Garden remarks Saturday included his belief that he possesses the authority to launch strikes even without congressional authorization, Rosen adds.
The White House Saturday sent Congress a draft of a resolution authorizing Obama to use military force against Syria and laying out the administration’s claim that Assad’s regime killed more than 1,000 last week in a chemical weapons attack.
The resolution also says the objective of a U.S. military response would be to “deter, disrupt, prevent and degrade” the regime’s ability to use chemical weapons going forward.
The resolution authorizes Obama to use the military as he determines “necessary and appropriate” to serve that goal. The draft doesn’t lay out a timeline for action but does say only a political settlement can resolve the Syrian crisis.
TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Government; Israel; News/Current Events; Russia; United Kingdom; War on Terror; Click to Add Topic
-
Now, before everyone attacks me instead of answering the Q, let me be very clear - we should close OUR borders, bring most troops home, spend the military budget on alternative energy sources, and let everyone on that side of earth blow each other up over oil nobody suddenly wants. that being said...
What happens if Obama WANTS to attack Syria... and Repubs do not...
Then Syria doesn't get bombed. You live in a democracy, not a dictatorship.
Do repubs vote AGAINST the war - and then what happens if 1000, 2000,
Or 20,000. Or 50,000. Or 500,000. What happens when ONE MILLION people are killed with chemical weapons? could this come back to bite repubs who are now suddenly very soft on an oil-important nation, who HAVE and are USING these WMD?
What makes you think this is likely? There is no evidence that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons. There is no evidence they intend to sell them.
Or, what happens is Assad starts selling his WMD or using it on his neighbors in the region. Would dems, in 2014, tell voters "We tried to stop this, but the repubs didn't want to stop this".
Yes, that is exactly what would happen, this is politics. Still, your scenarios are far fetched. You want to bomb Greece because you think they might create a deadly goat cheese bomb and start selling it to neighbors in the region?
In any case, the US has no responsibility. All that will happen if they start bombing Damascus is that thousands of civilians will die unnecessarily. These civilians would probably prefer to be alive. None of them will be thanking Obama for killing them with conventional weapons as opposed to chemicals. Let's face it, the whole mania about chemical weapons is bullshit anyway. People shouldn't be getting killed at all and it makes very little difference what sort of weapon kills them. Dead is dead.
IMO, repubs run a big political risk, and I think they might actually get ON BOARD with bombing any nation that uses WMD like Syria did. imagine if some syrian idiot opens a suitcase of WMD on US soil... guess what repubs, you prevented Obama from stopping that bad guy - true or false, that becomes the narrative.
So yes, I think IF it comes to a vote, repubs will get on board with bombing syria for fear of another attack that they could have stoppped.
Then you may as well just bomb everybody. Let's just hope that like in the UK vote, a little common sense prevails.
-
President Obama will carry out military action against Syria even if Congress votes against it, a senior State Department official tells Fox News’ Chief Washington Correspondent James Rosen.
If true, the USA is no longer a democracy.
-
If 240 is suggesting that the GOP will look like hypocrites for voting nay when it comes to Syria after voting yay on Iraq, then he has a point.
It's obvious at this point that the President can and will go over all the heads he needs to in order to achieve Globalist goals.
-
If 240 is suggesting that the GOP will look like hypocrites for voting nay when it comes to Syria after voting yay on Iraq, then he has a point.
It's obvious at this point that the President can and will go over all the heads he needs to in order to achieve Globalist goals.
or is he suggesting that the will look like they have learned their lessons and the democrats have not?
-
I'm sorry, but if republicans say "Let's vote for this nonsense war because if we don't, he's just going to start it anyway"
Then they are the weakest, most pathetic group EVER. I hope that's not a defense being created here lol.
And I'm not even really saying they'll be hypocrites about the Iraq thing. What I'm saying is, the same way most dems HAD to support iraq (which many people believed was about lust for war, NOT WMD we couldn't find) - I think repubs are going to be caught in that trap too.
If the repubs vote AGAINST it, then chemical WMD are used on us or our allies, Obama will stand up there and say "I told you so - we could have stopped this, but republicans let politics get in the way..." blah blah.
So I think they will fold, if given a vote. Does anyone agree or disagree?
-
If 240 is suggesting that the GOP will look like hypocrites for voting nay when it comes to Syria after voting yay on Iraq, then he has a point.
It's obvious at this point that the President can and will go over all the heads he needs to in order to achieve Globalist goals.
240 will do anything to protect Obama. He rather defend treason than admit he was wrong about the Kenyan grifter in the wh
-
240 will do anything to protect Obama. He rather defend treason than admit he was wrong about the Kenyan grifter in the wh
33/soul crusher,
What is your take? Do you think Repubs will fold? There is a whole lotta "240 sucks" but nobody wants to debate an actual Q that is VERY relevant... Obama wants congressional approval - WILL THE REPUBS GIVE IT TO HIM? YES OR NO?
-
33/soul crusher,
What is your take? Do you think Repubs will fold? There is a whole lotta "240 sucks" but nobody wants to debate an actual Q that is VERY relevant... Obama wants congressional approval - WILL THE REPUBS GIVE IT TO HIM? YES OR NO?
Yes they will cause the GOP is worthless and complicit in every single Obama crime up till now.
-
Obama's entire foreign policy credibility is on the line. This is his crisis alone. He should never have said he was drawing a red line on chems if he had no real intent, domestic support or international support to bomb in Syria. He has no...NO relationship with republicans. He does everthing he can to critize the party. He wants it all his own way. So I hope they tell him to go fuck himself. There are plenty of Dems in the senate that want no part of this. Failing that, they should bargin. He wants his bullshit war...we want a whole bunch of other shit..see who blinks
-
Yes they will cause the GOP is worthless and complicit in every single Obama crime up till now.
I do respect you for saying you think the GOP will give obama this war. Most others on the board won't comment either way. I also think they will vote for the war. One thing politicians cannot do is expose themselves to "We could have stopped this mass murderer from using WMD, but these 25 congressman voted against it..."
And I KNOW most dems want no part of it either... but if someone opens up a can of Sarin on the US or its allies, suddenly the whole nation says "Why didn't you stop this when we KNEW they had WMD". I think both parties have to give obama the war he wants here.
-
I do respect you for saying you think the GOP will give obama this war. Most others on the board won't comment either way. I also think they will vote for the war. One thing politicians cannot do is expose themselves to "We could have stopped this mass murderer from using WMD, but these 25 congressman voted against it..."
And I KNOW most dems want no part of it either... but if someone opens up a can of Sarin on the US or its allies, suddenly the whole nation says "Why didn't you stop this when we KNEW they had WMD". I think both parties have to give obama the war he wants here.
Locally the gop ass faces are already calling for strikes. The GOP needs to be disbanded
-
Now, before everyone attacks me instead of answering the Q, let me be very clear - we should close OUR borders, bring most troops home, spend the military budget on alternative energy sources, and let everyone on that side of earth blow each other up over oil nobody suddenly wants. that being said...
What happens if Obama WANTS to attack Syria... and Repubs do not...
Do repubs vote AGAINST the war - and then what happens if 1000, 2000,
Or 20,000. Or 50,000. Or 500,000. What happens when ONE MILLION people are killed with chemical weapons? could this come back to bite repubs who are now suddenly very soft on an oil-important nation, who HAVE and are USING these WMD?
Or, what happens is Assad starts selling his WMD or using it on his neighbors in the region. Would dems, in 2014, tell voters "We tried to stop this, but the repubs didn't want to stop this".
IMO, repubs run a big political risk, and I think they might actually get ON BOARD with bombing any nation that uses WMD like Syria did. imagine if some syrian idiot opens a suitcase of WMD on US soil... guess what repubs, you prevented Obama from stopping that bad guy - true or false, that becomes the narrative.
So yes, I think IF it comes to a vote, repubs will get on board with bombing syria for fear of another attack that they could have stoppped.
Obama needs to pretend he doesn't want to bomb Syria so that the Repubs can disagree with him and "force" him to do it
I think we all know by now that's the only way to get anything done in this country these days
-
Obama's entire foreign policy credibility is on the line. This is his crisis alone. He should never have said he was drawing a red line on chems if he had no real intent, domestic support or international support to bomb in Syria. He has no...NO relationship with republicans. He does everthing he can to critize the party. He wants it all his own way. So I hope they tell him to go fuck himself. There are plenty of Dems in the senate that want no part of this. Failing that, they should bargin. He wants his bullshit war...we want a whole bunch of other shit..see who blinks
X2
Obama's own party is just as split on this as are the Republicans.
The Nobel Peace Prize laureate lacks support from his own party, the American people, and our strongest ally, Great Britain.
Incompetence on display again in the White House.
-
can someone explain to me again who voted the US the policeman of the world? I dont remember voting in that election?
Why is it up to the US to determine who is right and who is wrong? USA is God now?
Im confused ??? ???
-
can someone explain to me again who voted the US the policeman of the world? I dont remember voting in that election?
Why is it up to the US to determine who is right and who is wrong? USA is God now?
Im confused ??? ???
the military industrial complex needs something to do with all their toys
-
can someone explain to me again who voted the US the policeman of the world? I dont remember voting in that election?
Why is it up to the US to determine who is right and who is wrong? USA is God now?
Im confused ??? ???
ask Bob
-
X2
Obama's own party is just as split on this as are the Republicans.
The Nobel Peace Prize laureate lacks support from his own party, the American people, and our strongest ally, Great Britain.
Incompetence on display again in the White House.
If decides to go it alone we know at least Dick Cheney will fully understand and offer public support (as will all Repubs on this board who supported Cheney/Bush)
-
LMFAO i love when the liberals excuse obamas actions by comparing them to people they couldnt stand a few years ago.
-
Now, before everyone attacks me instead of answering the Q, let me be very clear - we should close OUR borders, bring most troops home, spend the military budget on alternative energy sources, and let everyone on that side of earth blow each other up over oil nobody suddenly wants. that being said...
What happens if Obama WANTS to attack Syria... and Repubs do not...
Do repubs vote AGAINST the war - and then what happens if 1000, 2000,
Or 20,000. Or 50,000. Or 500,000. What happens when ONE MILLION people are killed with chemical weapons? could this come back to bite repubs who are now suddenly very soft on an oil-important nation, who HAVE and are USING these WMD?
Or, what happens is Assad starts selling his WMD or using it on his neighbors in the region. Would dems, in 2014, tell voters "We tried to stop this, but the repubs didn't want to stop this".
IMO, repubs run a big political risk, and I think they might actually get ON BOARD with bombing any nation that uses WMD like Syria did. imagine if some syrian idiot opens a suitcase of WMD on US soil... guess what repubs, you prevented Obama from stopping that bad guy - true or false, that becomes the narrative.
So yes, I think IF it comes to a vote, repubs will get on board with bombing syria for fear of another attack that they could have stoppped.
So your contention is that 100% of the democrats will support the president in this military action.
-
LMFAO i love when the liberals excuse obamas actions by comparing them to people they couldnt stand a few years ago.
it never fails to make me laugh how you need every little thing explained to you
when did I EVER say I was excusing, endorsing or condoning Obama's actions (or proposed actions since he hasn't done a damn thing yet)
why do I need to explain this to you over and over again?
-
it never fails to make me laugh how you need every little thing explained to you
when did I EVER say I was excusing, endorsing or condoning Obama's actions (or proposed actions since he hasn't done a damn thing yet)
why do I need to explain this to you over and over again?
LMFAO so you brought up dick cheney and bush for what reason?
just a history lesson?
-
LMFAO so you brought up dick cheney and bush for what reason?
just a history lesson?
:D ;D
-
So your contention is that 100% of the democrats will support the president in this military action.
when did I say "100%" of anything? There will always been the kuscinishs and rands of the group that will grandstand.
however, I feel if there is a war bill,, the majority of repubs and the majority of dems will back it.
-
LMFAO so you brought up dick cheney and bush for what reason?
just a history lesson?
god you are dense
I brought it up in the context of Obama going it alone without broad public support or worse, without congressional approval
he would look like just as much of an ASSHOLE as Cheney
why the fuck must I explain everything to you
-
god you are dense
I brought it up in the context of Obama going it alone without broad public support or worse, without congressional approval
he would look like just as much of an ASSHOLE as Cheney
why the fuck must I explain everything to you
Bush had a coalition and congressional approval - WARbama has nothing but his buddies in al Queada, the MB, and MSNBC and progressive pansies backing him up.
-
Bush had a coalition and congressional approval - WARbama has nothing but his buddies in al Queada, the MB, and MSNBC and progressive pansies backing him up.
at the time of that statement by Cheney the public support was pretty much gone
also, try to keep this point in your tiny diseased brain
Obama has taken NO ACTION yet so we don't know what he will do yet or whether he will have congressional support
I'm sure there are plenty of Dems who are against it and plenty of Repubs who are in favor
I don't know if he can make the case that this is in our national interest (As I've said before I don't see why chemical weapons make any difference when both sides are nutbags and Assad has already slaughtered 100K + with conventional weapons)
-
at the time of that statement by Cheney the public support was pretty much gone
also, try to keep this point in your tiny diseased brain
Obama has taken NO ACTION yet so we don't know what he will do yet or whether he will have congressional support
I'm sure there are plenty of Dems who are against it and plenty of Repubs who are in favor
I don't know if he can make the case that this is in our national interest (As I've said before I don't see why chemical weapons make any difference when both sides are nutbags and Assad has already slaughtered 100K + with conventional weapons)
-
god you are dense
I brought it up in the context of Obama going it alone without broad public support or worse, without congressional approval
he would look like just as much of an ASSHOLE as Cheney
why the fuck must I explain everything to you
LMFAO yea thats exactly what you meant to convey when posting this
If decides to go it alone we know at least Dick Cheney will fully understand and offer public support (as will all Repubs on this board who supported Cheney/Bush)
-
LMFAO yea thats exactly what you meant to convey when posting this
It's called SARCASM moron
-
It's called SARCASM moron
its called backtracking dip shit
-
its called backtracking dip shit
jesus christ you are STUPID
when you read that you actually believed that I was saying that Cheney and republicans who supported Cheneys actions (at the time) would now "fully understand and offer their public support" to Obama ?
you are a stupid, stupid man ...
-
I have to say, Straw Man is destroying everyone in this thread. hahah good work.
Republicans are the new hippies:
(http://rt.com/files/news/20/4d/90/00/fb.jpg)
-
PELOSI supports limited strikes on Syria: MSNBC.
I jut read this on another forum. If true, well, expect a lotta dems to fall right in line. Go up against obama, hilary, AND pelosi, well, it might be hard next election time.
-
PELOSI supports limited strikes on Syria: MSNBC.
I jut read this on another forum. If true, well, expect a lotta dems to fall right in line. Go up against obama, hilary, AND pelosi, well, it might be hard next election time.
is this a suprise for you 240?
pelosi supports obama, who knew? ::)
-
is this a suprise for you 240?
pelosi supports obama, who knew? ::)
It means the dems will probably fall in line and circle jerk about how awesome this war will be.
If the dems and obama are on board, along with romney, mccain, graham - there is NO WAY the repubs don't give them the bill.
I'm scared shitless of a war with syria. But seeing this pelosi statement makes me think it's inevitable now.
-
It means the dems will probably fall in line and circle jerk about how awesome this war will be.
If the dems and obama are on board, along with romney, mccain, graham - there is NO WAY the repubs don't give them the bill.
I'm scared shitless of a war with syria. But seeing this pelosi statement makes me think it's inevitable now.
thats not what I asked there brainchild, I asked if you were suprised?
if you really feel the way you do, then it was never even a question to you if the dems would vote for it as they werent going to go against your saviour.
-
thats not what I asked there brainchild, I asked if you were suprised?
if you really feel the way you do, then it was never even a question to you if the dems would vote for it as they werent going to go against your saviour.
You are too bitter lately. :D
-
It means the dems will probably fall in line and circle jerk about how awesome this war will be.
If the dems and obama are on board, along with romney, mccain, graham - there is NO WAY the repubs don't give them the bill.
I'm scared shitless of a war with syria. But seeing this pelosi statement makes me think it's inevitable now.
We're going to war no doubt.
None of those in office want to talk about what they've been doing, what the economy is doing, no budget, scandals, debt ceiling, etc. Both sides not just Dems...
$5 gas will be a nice distraction for them.
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10282697/US-general-says-Syria-action-could-be-more-substantial-than-thought.html
Here we go.
-
or is he suggesting that the will look like they have learned their lessons and the democrats have not?
I dunno if they've learned their lesson from iraq. I'd say we're going to keep seeing more and more dems - and repubs - getting onboard for war in the coming days. We have a situation where pelosi, mccain, and obama all want the same thing. :(
-
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/09/02/what-obama-biden-did-after-strike-syria-speech-even-disgusts-media-82608
Obama really is GHETTO and a piece of shit. He and his grafter family should go fight along side Al Queada in Syria if he feels so strongly about it.
-
"we're hardly going it alone in Syria. Al Qqueda will be providing ground support"
Obama
-
Now, before everyone attacks me instead of answering the Q, let me be very clear - we should close OUR borders, bring most troops home, spend the military budget on alternative energy sources, and let everyone on that side of earth blow each other up over oil nobody suddenly wants. that being said...
What happens if Obama WANTS to attack Syria... and Repubs do not...
Do repubs vote AGAINST the war - and then what happens if 1000, 2000,
Or 20,000. Or 50,000. Or 500,000. What happens when ONE MILLION people are killed with chemical weapons? could this come back to bite repubs who are now suddenly very soft on an oil-important nation, who HAVE and are USING these WMD?
Or, what happens is Assad starts selling his WMD or using it on his neighbors in the region. Would dems, in 2014, tell voters "We tried to stop this, but the repubs didn't want to stop this".
IMO, repubs run a big political risk, and I think they might actually get ON BOARD with bombing any nation that uses WMD like Syria did. imagine if some syrian idiot opens a suitcase of WMD on US soil... guess what repubs, you prevented Obama from stopping that bad guy - true or false, that becomes the narrative.
So yes, I think IF it comes to a vote, repubs will get on board with bombing syria for fear of another attack that they could have stoppped.
Why should I give a shit? It's Al-Qaeda vs Hezbollah. I couldn't give two flying fucks.
Actually Syria has no oil.....however, I think the Repubs are held hostage to their Libertarian and Tea Party wings and although I think they will approve, it night prove difficult and it will be made into an issue in the midterm elections......any Repub who sides with Obama on ANYTHING will be subject to a primary challenge......all Repubs know this
Syria does have oil, almost all of which is controlled by the Kurds as of right now. Hence why Al-Nusra and the other militants have been increasing their attacks on the Kurdish territories.
Intervention will be a fucking disaster and guarantee a state handed to Al-Qaeda and its allies. The FSA is non-existent and the few fighting brigades in it do most of their fighting alongside Al-Nusra and the other Islamists.
-
The same idiots like 240 who have been proven wrong on Libya, Egypt, etc etc are still trying to defend Obama and his crimes and bullshit.
They are no different than the jim jones cultists. Fuck them.
Why should I give a shit? It's Al-Qaeda vs Hezbollah. I couldn't give two flying fucks.
Syria does have oil, almost all of which is controlled by the Kurds as of right now. Hence why Al-Nusra and the other militants have been increasing their attacks on the Kurdish territories.
Intervention will be a fucking disaster and guarantee a state handed to Al-Qaeda and its allies. The FSA is non-existent and the few fighting brigades in it do most of their fighting alongside Al-Nusra and the other Islamists.
-
The same idiots like 240 who have been proven wrong on Libya, Egypt, etc etc are still trying to defend Obama and his crimes and bullshit.
They are no different than the jim jones cultists. Fuck them.
It's hilarious watching all these supposedly "anti-war", sycophantic Obama cocksuckers now beat the drums of war because their God-King wants ANOTHER war. Too funny. It's Iraq all over again and clowns like 240 are trying to rationalize it. ::)
-
Weapons Obama Promised To Syrian Rebels Still Haven’t Been Delivered, CIA Unable To Find Non-Jihadi Forces They Can Safely Give Arms To
In June, the White House authorized the Central Intelligence Agency to help arm moderate fighters battling the Assad regime, a signal to Syrian rebels that the cavalry was coming. Three months later, they are still waiting.
The delay, in part, reflects a broader U.S. approach rarely discussed publicly but that underpins its decision-making, according to former and current U.S. officials: The Obama administration doesn’t want to tip the balance in favor of the opposition for fear the outcome may be even worse for U.S. interests than the current stalemate.
U.S. officials attribute the delay in providing small arms and munitions from the CIA weapons program to the difficulty of establishing secure delivery “pipelines” to prevent weapons from falling into the wrong hands, in particular Jihadi militants also battling the Assad regime.
Allied rebel commanders in Syria and congressional proponents of a more aggressive military response instead blame a White House that wants to be seen as responsive to allies’ needs but fundamentally doesn’t want to get pulled any deeper into the country’s grinding conflict.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324202304579051280341316034.html?mod=wsj_share_tweet
Surprise!!!!! ::)
-
Boehner Says He Supports Obama’s Call for Action on Syria
Speaker John A. Boehner said on Tuesday he would “support the president’s call to action” in Syria after meeting with President Obama and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., giving the president a crucial ally in the quest for votes in the House.
Mr. Obama summoned Mr. Boehner and other Republican and Democratic leaders to the White House as he intensified his push for Congressional approval of an attack on Syria. Conservative House Repubicans have expressed deep reluctance about the president’s strategy, and winning Mr. Boehner’s approval could help the president make inroads with a group thta has not supported him on most issues in the past.,
For Mr. Obama, who leaves on Tuesday evening for a three-day trip to Sweden and Russia, it is the next phase in a White House lobbying campaign that will have to extend beyond hawks like Mr. McCain to persuade lawmakers who are reluctant to get involved militarily in Syria.
READ MORE »
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/04/us/politics/obama-administration-presses-case-on-syria.html?emc=edit_na_20130903
>:(
-
Boehner Says He Supports Obama’s Call for Action on Syria
Speaker John A. Boehner said on Tuesday he would “support the president’s call to action” in Syria after meeting with President Obama and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., giving the president a crucial ally in the quest for votes in the House.
Mr. Obama summoned Mr. Boehner and other Republican and Democratic leaders to the White House as he intensified his push for Congressional approval of an attack on Syria. Conservative House Repubicans have expressed deep reluctance about the president’s strategy, and winning Mr. Boehner’s approval could help the president make inroads with a group thta has not supported him on most issues in the past.,
For Mr. Obama, who leaves on Tuesday evening for a three-day trip to Sweden and Russia, it is the next phase in a White House lobbying campaign that will have to extend beyond hawks like Mr. McCain to persuade lawmakers who are reluctant to get involved militarily in Syria.
READ MORE »
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/04/us/politics/obama-administration-presses-case-on-syria.html?emc=edit_na_20130903
>:(
Another name to add to your sign for your Code Pink rally. :D
-
Another name to add to your sign for your Code Pink rally. :D
Code Pink? Haven't seen much of them since Obama was elected.
-
Code Pink? Haven't seen much of them since Obama was elected.
They have been hating Obama since day one and now Conservatives are joining Code Pink in Droves. Its hilarious.
(http://jimbovard.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/DSC_0018-800x531.jpg)
(http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Screen-Shot-2013-03-11-at-12.00.02-PM-620x412.png)
-
Does anyone still doubt the repubs are going to cave for obama's bullshit war here?
-
Does anyone still doubt the repubs are going to cave for obama's bullshit war here?
Its not a bullshit war at all. It has many geopolitical implications and will be incredibly useful to weaken the terrorist state. Obama has held fast to his goal of weakening the Muslim Extremists all over the Middle East and there has not been an administration to equal what he has been able to do regarding terrorism/muslim extremism. Its a huge benefit to humanity and to the world not to mention our own National Security.
Think of it as taking out the long overdue trash.
-
Its not a bullshit war at all. It has many geopolitical implications and will be incredibly useful to weaken the terrorist state. Obama has held fast to his goal of weakening the Muslim Extremists all over the Middle East and there has not been an administration to equal what he has been able to do regarding terrorism/muslim extremism. Its a huge benefit to humanity and to the world not to mention our own National Security.
Think of it as taking out the long overdue trash.
IMO, the reasons we're giving are bullshit. We want to control some oil avenues in the future. We should just say that :)
We want to clear out a lot of riff-raff, get a foothold to surround/manage the remaining riff-raff, and make sure we're not cut out of the loop for the oil paths.
We should just say that :)
-
IMO, the reasons we're giving are bullshit. We want to control some oil avenues in the future. We should just say that :)
We want to clear out a lot of riff-raff, get a foothold to surround/manage the remaining riff-raff, and make sure we're not cut out of the loop for the oil paths.
We should just say that :)
Oh really? Just like all of that oil we got from Iraq. :D :D :D :D :D Flowing like the Tigris, thick as the Euphrates. :D :D : :D
I think the oil conspiracy excuse can go ahead and die already. It just doesn`t fly anymore.
-
It's hilarious watching all these supposedly "anti-war", sycophantic Obama cocksuckers now beat the drums of war because their God-King wants ANOTHER war. Too funny. It's Iraq all over again and clowns like 240 are trying to rationalize it. ::)
it really is. but they all make sure to stress that the Republican party must be in agreement with Obama's war or they are the hypocrites. tell them they can get their abortions, give them some fucking handouts, and give them their gay marriages and all of a sudden they all turn pro war. fucking lemmings.
-
it really is. but they all make sure to stress that the Republican party must be in agreement with Obama's war or they are the hypocrites. tell them they can get their abortions, give them some fucking handouts, and give them their gay marriages and all of a sudden they all turn pro war. fucking lemmings.
???
-
it really is. but they all make sure to stress that the Republican party must be in agreement with Obama's war or they are the hypocrites. tell them they can get their abortions, give them some fucking handouts, and give them their gay marriages and all of a sudden they all turn pro war. fucking lemmings.
Yaeh abortions and handouts creates psycopaths. Im with you Bear. you have said it all along.