Bluto: What? Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!
Otter: [to Boon] Germans?
Boon: Forget it, he's rolling.
Posted on 09/02/2013 4:19:39 PM PDT by Libloather
Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) said Monday that the administration's argument that letting Syria's use of sarin gas last month go unchecked would hurt U.S. security was "not logical" and did not "make any sense."
Administration officials have argued that the U.S. should respond to the attack because the failure to do so would send a message to other regimes — and terror groups — that the use of chemical weapons was acceptable.
But in an interview with CNN's "New Day," Grayson said that too few countries had chemical weapons for that to be a concern.
"There's only four countries in the world that have chemical weapons," Grayson said. "The largest of the four is the United States. So are we trying to send a message to ourselves? That's not logical."
The Florida Democrat went on to reject the argument made by Secretary of State John Kerry on ABC News' "This Week" that a failure to respond " will be granting a blanket license to Assad to continue to gas and we will send the wrong message to Iran, North Dkorea and other countries.
"I've heard that theory before somehow one country's actions will affect another country's and another country's and another country's," Grayson said. "It's just the Domino argument again. We'll call it the 'bomb-ino' argument. It's not logical, doesn't make any sense."
Grayson said the chemical attack on the Damascus suburbs "absolutely" did not threaten American national security interests.
"We are not the world's policeman," he said. "We can't afford this anymore, these military adventures that lead us into wars that last for a decade or more. It's wrong. We need to cut it off before it even happens."
The White House argues if the U.S. does not act, Hezbollah and Iran, among others, would see there are no consequences for violating the international law against using chemical weaons.
"Anyone who is concerned about Iran and its efforts in the region should support this action," a White House official said.
Grayson Slammed For Sharing Classified NSA Documents, Threatened With Sanctions
Hell must have froze over...I agree with this barking moonbat libtard...
Bluto: What? Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!
Otter: [to Boon] Germans?
Boon: Forget it, he's rolling.
...if wing nut Grayson isn’t going along with this Odungo is in trouble
To all the liberal hawks including those in the main stream media , remember ? Let UN sanctions work before any action in Syria.
Well a broken clock you know..so they say.
OMG....OMG.....OMG....I HATE that I’m agreeing with this NUTJOB!!! Maybe I should re think my position.....NAH...blind squirrel.....and Grayson is NOTHING if not SQUIRRELY!
I’m feeling so conflicted......
First Calypso Louis, now Grayson.
Grayson? Isn’t he that guy who’s nuts?
This is why he has to get those two idiots, McCain and Graham on board. Let the Republicans allow him to save face.
I don’t know where he gets four countries having chemical weapons. That is absurdly low. My understanding is that it is closer to 30.
I feel dirty but I agree with him too.~shudder
Blind pig, broken clock...
The dems plan is to make the stoopid party responsible. You don’t think they are going to lose elections because of this do you?
Doing this will also be a great way to cause more havoc in the GOP. Which it will work.
Barky’s strategos are banking that enough Republicans go along with this so the lefties will be able vote no and yet Barky will get his authorization. The Graysons don’t really care about bombing Syria as long as they can say “I didn’t go along.” to their extremist supporters The only fly in the ointment comes if the authorization is defeated in a bi partisan vote. Then the Graysons in Congress will be stuck when Barky sends the Tomahawks anyway. The problem for everyone is what happens if the attacks kill Russians or Chinese and what happens if those Syrian coast defense SSMs reach out and touch one or two of those Arleigh Burkes in the Med.
Yes. So, why would anyone care what he says?
I hate to agree with this lunatic.
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.