Skip to comments.
So You Want to Intervene in Syria Without Breaking the Law?
Foreign Policy ^
| JUNE 20, 2013
| Rosa Brooks
Posted on 06/20/2013 4:19:34 PM PDT by nickcarraway
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-28 last
To: Newbomb Turk
Congress declaring war is so Eighteenth Century.
To: nickcarraway
22
posted on
06/20/2013 8:18:02 PM PDT
by
Slings and Arrows
(You can't have IngSoc without an Emmanuel Goldstein)
To: nickcarraway
So You Want to Intervene in Syria Without Breaking the Law? I do not want to intervene in Syria. I have never wanted to intervene in Syria and I can think of very few scenarios that would leave me wanting to intervene in Syria.
Let the devil sort it out.
23
posted on
06/20/2013 8:21:46 PM PDT
by
Harmless Teddy Bear
(Revenge is a dish best served with pinto beans and muffins)
To: Colonel Kangaroo
The LAST thi g you want is to officially declare war with this moron in office. The Chinese could be marching down Ventura BLVD and I would not want a formal declaration of war.
You guys need to understand that with that declaration, you hand the President almost unlimited and unrestrained power. If he got his hands on that he would declare himself a near god, and our country would end as we know it.
That was the real reason for the WPA. No one wanted Nixon as dictator.
24
posted on
06/20/2013 8:26:44 PM PDT
by
Vermont Lt
(Does anybody really know what time it is? Does anybody really care?)
To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...
Thanks nickcarraway.
You're not Dick Cheney, and you don't like being compared to Cheney.
That's twice in one day.
25
posted on
06/20/2013 9:15:06 PM PDT
by
SunkenCiv
(McCain or Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
To: NonValueAdded; SJackson
It is pretty clear that Russia has strategic interests in Syria and is drawing a red line of their own. So be it, leverage that.
To get there however the opposition needs to be strong enough to check Assad. That's the argument for our arming the rebels, albeit indirectly (e.g. Saudi Arabia sends arms to the rebels, we send arms to Saudi Arabia to replace them).
The contras in Nicaragua committed a lot of unsavory actions, but was justifiable in that Nicaragua at that time was an outpost of the Soviet empire.
Islamists, both Al Qaeda and Iran/Hezbollah, are now a greater strategic threat to us than Putin's Russia.
26
posted on
06/21/2013 6:56:24 AM PDT
by
kenavi
("Beware of rulers, for they befriend only for their own benefit." Gamliel)
To: kenavi
The contras in Nicaragua committed a lot of unsavory actions, but was justifiable in that Nicaragua at that time was an outpost of the Soviet empire....Islamists, both Al Qaeda and Iran/Hezbollah, are now a greater strategic threat to us than Putin's Russia.The Contras weren't our enemies, al Qaeda, Iran, Hizbollah are. I'd suggest letting them kill each other for a few years isn't the worst solution. If we're going to insert ourselves, credibility requires we do it with the intention of our side winning, and I'm not sure al Quaeda and other assorted Sunni terrorists are "our side". If the idea is supplying arms to prolong a stalemate, better to let the Saudi's do it. I don't think that's our intention, but if it is, that's fine.
27
posted on
06/21/2013 8:07:41 AM PDT
by
SJackson
(The Pilgrims—Doing the jobs Native Americans wouldn’t do !)
To: nickcarraway
Ah yes, The Democratic Socialist of America founder marxist. Also member of the older Socialist Scholars Conferences of the 1960’s.
Another Saul Alinsky contempary.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-28 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson