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.
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 youwhen 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?
So your contention is that 100% of the democrats will support the president in this military action.
god you are denseI brought it up in the context of Obama going it alone without broad public support or worse, without congressional approvalhe would look like just as much of an ASSHOLE as Cheneywhy 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.
at the time of that statement by Cheney the public support was pretty much gonealso, try to keep this point in your tiny diseased brainObama has taken NO ACTION yet so we don't know what he will do yet or whether he will have congressional supportI'm sure there are plenty of Dems who are against it and plenty of Repubs who are in favorI 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)
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
its called backtracking dip shit
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?
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.
or is he suggesting that the will look like they have learned their lessons and the democrats have not?
