still waiting for explanation of how Syria is a'threat to our national security'

[JOHN MATRIX]

Crickets......

[Soul Crusher]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/09/05/pelosi-not-sure-house-democrats-will-back-syria-resolution

RATlosi calls W a Cowboy but O-TWINK "One tough hombre" 


Go figure - we have to vote for the war first to see who we are helping - Pelosi 

[Straw Man]

Crickets......

I've wondered this too (and even mentioned it on this board)

The argument that I'm seeing (and i tend to agree with it) is that the US is part of multinational agreements to ban the use of these weapons and to eradicate them

The US should act in accordance with these agreements (as should the other nations that participated)

The other more practical reason would be that these weapons exists in Syria and if we don't eradicate them they could eventually wind up in the hands of groups that will use them against our troops or our allies.

There are no good guys in Syria, only bad guys and worse guys and we don't really want these weapons in the hands of either group

[Fury]

Crickets......

It will only become a threat after Assad is removed and they are able to focus their attention elsewhere.

As it stands we should just sit back and watch AQ and Hezbollah kill each other.

[Pray_4_War]

I've wondered this too (and even mentioned it on this board)

The argument that I'm seeing (and i tend to agree with it) is that the US is part of multinational agreements to ban the use of these weapons and to eradicate them

The US should act in accordance with these agreements (as should the other nations that participated)

The other more practical reason would be that these weapons exists in Syria and if we don't eradicate them they could eventually wind up in the hands of groups that will use them against our troops or our allies.

There are no good guys in Syria, only bad guys and worse guys and we don't really want these weapons in the hands of either group

That sounds remarkably like the argument that George W Bush made for invading Iraq.  After all, we know that Sadaam had WMD's because he used them to gas the Kurds.

[Straw Man]

That sounds remarkably like the argument that George W Bush made for invading Iraq.  After all, we know that Sadaam had WMD's because he used them to gas the Kurds.

except for one key difference

Iraq never had WMD's and Bush knew it but just fabricated the "intelligence" because he wanted to invade and occupy the country

Obama is not talking about invading or occupying and he appears to be waiting for actual proof that chemical weapons were used

[Fury]

except for one key difference

Iraq never had WMD's and Bush knew it but just fabricated the "intelligence" because he wanted to invade and occupy the country

Obama is not talking about invading or occupying and he appears to be waiting for actual proof that chemical weapons were used

How did he gas the Kurds then, genius? 

Fact of the matter is that this is the exact same thing and the sycophantic heads of the Obamabots (like yourself) are on the verge of spontaneously combusting.

Obama = Bush, LOLOLOL.

[Hugo Chavez]

Obama is not talking about invading or occupying

lol and what's that contingent on?  That Assad will take his spanking like a good little boy?  Sit back and watch his capabilities totaled in 48 hours, that his allies will do the same?  What happens if he by himself or with help from his allies actually pulls off a counter attack of some kind? That'll change the game won't it?

Yea, there's a difference... Iraq was just stupid, this is completely insane.

If we're doing this because it's a "global norm" to prevent chemical weapons use but nobody else in the world wants to step in on this one, there's your freaking answer.

It's not our job to enforce global "norms"  WTF is that anyway?  Norms, lol, are we just using that term now because Syria didn't sign with the chemical weapons convention?  Shit, isn't that why Israel gets away with having nukes and threatening to use them occationally, that they didn't sign the ban Iran did?  Nobody is "global norming" their ass lol...

[Hugo Chavez]

How did he gas the Kurds then, genius? 

Fact of the matter is that this is the exact same thing and the sycophantic heads of the Obamabots (like yourself) are on the verge of spontaneously combusting.

Obama = Bush, LOLOLOL.

I thought the gassing of Kurds happened well before the period inspectors had managed on finding and destroying most of their chemical stockpiles.  I doubt there was much left when we went to war with Iraq in "the war on terror."

[Shockwave]

America, Fuck Yeah..... coming again, to save the mother fuckin' day, Yeah.

Team America, world Police

[Straw Man]

I thought the gassing of Kurds happened well before the period inspectors had managed on finding and destroying most of their chemical stockpiles.  I doubt there was much left when we went to war with Iraq in "the war on terror."

there was nothing left prior to the start of the 2nd war

we know this because not only did we find nothing but when we captured Saddam he admitted this

[Straw Man]

lol and what's that contingent on?  That Assad will take his spanking like a good little boy?  Sit back and watch his capabilities totaled in 48 hours, that his allies will do the same?  What happens if he by himself or with help from his allies actually pulls off a counter attack of some kind? That'll change the game won't it?

Yea, there's a difference... Iraq was just stupid, this is completely insane.

If we're doing this because it's a "global norm" to prevent chemical weapons use but nobody else in the world wants to step in on this one, there's your freaking answer.

It's not our job to enforce global "norms"  WTF is that anyway?  Norms, lol, are we just using that term now because Syria didn't sign with the chemical weapons convention?  Shit, isn't that why Israel gets away with having nukes and threatening to use them occationally, that they didn't sign the ban Iran did?  Nobody is "global norming" their ass lol...

nothing at all

we may well have boots on the ground as some point but let me know when we start building permanent bases there complete with fast food chains

btw - when did I mention "global norms"

where is that from

[Pray_4_War]

I thought the gassing of Kurds happened well before the period inspectors had managed on finding and destroying most of their chemical stockpiles.  I doubt there was much left when we went to war with Iraq in "the war on terror."

There was speculation back then by the intelligence community that because Sadaam had so much time to prepare he shipped his WMDs to Syria on commercial jets.   

[Hugo Chavez]

nothing at all

we may well have boots on the ground as some point but let me know when we start building permanent bases there complete with fast food chains

btw - when did I mention "global norms"

where is that from

where did I say you mentioned global norms.  That's Obama's big point.  It's not irrelevant.

[nasht5]

syria is a threat to our national securtiy due to oil. it's all about oil.

[Straw Man]

where did I say you mentioned global norms.  That's Obama's big point.  It's not irrelevant.

I never said it was irrelevant I just didn't know where it came from

[tonymctones]

straw so are you now on board with this war?

[Mr.1derful]

syria is a threat to our national securtiy due to oil. it's all about oil.

From what I understand, it may have to do with wanting to build a natural gas pipeline through Syria.

[Hugo Chavez]

I never said it was irrelevant I just didn't know where it came from

Oh... well remember when they shot out the words, "mushroom cloud," all over to force public opinion on Iraq?

Well now it's a "global norm" we're defending and most importantly, if you don't support it, you're totally screwing America and leaving our country out to dry--wither on the vine. That's the narrative now for those voting in congress.  They have a choice between voting yea or voting to hang America out helplessly.  And there is no shortage of idiots making up stories that we are in danger of chemical attacks from Syria even though they have had these weapons for a very long time.

Nice huh... Don't believe me?  There's no shortage of both republicans and dems spewing this crap in the media to force the vote they want on the rest in congress. It's just as fucking pathetic as what we saw happen under Bush.

But this time, nobody wants it.  Do the rounds, pick a few articles on this at random and start reading through the thousands of comments.  Kudos to you if you can find 10 people for this war in less than an hour lol...  You'll find hundreds against it in minutes.  And the national polls reflect the same.

nobody wants this shit and people do understand this time why they don't want it.

[Soul Crusher]

  If we have iron clad proof that Assad ordered the chemical weapons' attack as Obama/Kerry claim, which would be a violation of Geneva Conventions, etc, and crossing a "Red Line" that Obama claims the "World" drew - why are we not presenting said evidence for a war crimes prosecution at the Hague International Criminal Court? 

hhhhmmmm?   Why?  1) Because we don't have the proof 2) his buddies in the  MB and Al Queada are getting beaten back by Assad  and 2) Obama is lying us into a war to cover up his scandals and failed Presidency.

He needs to be impeached immediately. 

[George Whorewell]

Crickets......

John McCain and John Kerry said Syria is a threat so it must be true.

[tonymctones]

Obama wouldn't lie to us

[Soul Crusher]

Obama wouldn't lie to us

http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/02/biden-all-gm-plants-would-have-shut-without-help


LMFAO!!!!  Biden accused Romney of wanting war w Syria in 2012!!!

LOL 

[JOHN MATRIX]

lol and what's that contingent on?  That Assad will take his spanking like a good little boy?  Sit back and watch his capabilities totaled in 48 hours, that his allies will do the same?  What happens if he by himself or with help from his allies actually pulls off a counter attack of some kind? That'll change the game won't it?

Yea, there's a difference... Iraq was just stupid, this is completely insane.

If we're doing this because it's a "global norm" to prevent chemical weapons use but nobody else in the world wants to step in on this one, there's your freaking answer.

It's not our job to enforce global "norms"  WTF is that anyway?  Norms, lol, are we just using that term now because Syria didn't sign with the chemical weapons convention?  Shit, isn't that why Israel gets away with having nukes and threatening to use them occationally, that they didn't sign the ban Iran did?  Nobody is "global norming" their ass lol...

Post of the year