(Vanity) So what's the concensus here so far? Do we attack Syria or not?

08/31/2013 | Self

[ReaganÜberAlles]

Ok, my feeing is if they used Chem Weapons on their own people, or on any other people for that matter they need to be hit hard. The chips fall where they may.

I would error on the side of hitting them too hard instead of too soft.

I'm thinking Reagan would have already done it.

[catnipman]

WTF are you blathering about hitting “them” hard?

“Them” who? Muslim extremist rebels who hate the West or the Muslim extremist dictator currently in power?

Why should we intervene in a civil war in any country where we have no strategic interest and where the conflict stays inside their borders, particularly when both sides of the civil war hate us? (Remember, never interfere with an enemy while he’s in the process of destroying himself.)

And besides, Obama’s is going to do this just because his universe-sized ego got a tiny bit bruised and he wants to do something (anything) so he can go about huffing and puffing and pretending like he’s a tough guy when in reality he’s just a dipshit.

Oh, yeah, and if he does this unilaterally without Congressional approval, making this just one more reason Congress should impeach him but won’t, it’ll be just one more of his many actions violating his oath of office to uphold the U.S. constitution and one more action he’ll be taking that will permanently render Congress irrelevant and push the U.S. presidency towards an all-powerful dictatorship for all Presidents in the future.

[novemberslady]

And my answer is no.

[cripplecreek]

The protest in Detroit yesterday against bombing Syria numbered some 200 people. There were 2 counter protesters.

[null and void]

Butt obama is a man’s man...

[null and void]

Obama could very well be the first president to get the Nobel Peace Prize AND a War Crimes trial!

[Thank You Rush]

“”So the new standard is we allow use of WNDs?””

Hit ‘em with World Net Daily’s????? Well, with some of their nutty conspiracy stuff wouldn’t be a bad idea.

[Hardraade]

And in today’s situation . with islam as an existential threat to humanity - he would have done whatever necessary. Incuding wiping their population centers out with megatonnage.

[Kirkwood]

If the situation were one where terrorism against US citizens and interests could be significantly reduced that would be something I could get behind. But here any intervention only supports the growth of terrorism. Let the terrorists kill each other. That used to be a goal of the US - get our enemies to kill one another.

[silverleaf]

1) who is “they”?

2) If Reagan saw 2 scorpions fighting to the death in a sand pit, why ever would he choose to go help one of them defeat the other? We think a scorpion makes a stable regime and a good ally?

[silverleaf]

come back next week or next month and tell us a faux staged military attack deterred the use of WMD’s

In fact al Qaeda recruitment offices will be real busy for the new jihad against a toothless America in Syria and every terrorist CEO in the world who can get hold of some gas will know exactly how to twist Obama’s briefs into a wad and goad him into mindless useless military intervention

[doorgunner69]

Muzzies killing muzzies, works for me.

[null and void]

I suspect three would suffice, mecca, media, and that damnable well in qom.

But if it requires the full Carthage treatment, I can live with that.

[ReaganÜberAlles]

Since our al is deterrence explain how doing nothing with accomplish that dummy.

[zbogwan2]

To many people get suckered into believing that Chemical Weapons are the most evil of evils? Just take a look at the Muslims raping, sodomizing, shooting, shelling, executing prisoners by a shot in the head and beheading foreigners and there own Muslim brothers. All of this is just fine with Obama and the International Community, but using gas is verboten. Go figure?
I say let Syria alone and let the country’s Civil War reach whatever conclusion it does.

[savage woman]

Forward thinking...
Needs to be an essay question.
Do we attack Syria or not? If majority says NO and Obozo
does attack, What then???
Whats our next question that we get polled on?

I say NO attack on Syria and see you in Washington when
Obozo attacks.

[arthurus]

What if, as there seems to be evidence, the chems were used by the rebels in order to bring the USA into the fight on their side? What if, as there seems to be more evidence, the rebels faked at lest part of the chem attack? The pictures of the bodies show no effects of gas. They are neat, no vomit, no contorted faces, they are just lying there and the children who were gassed in their beds are all dressed in street clothes.

Who has the motivation to use the gas? Assad knows the USA is itching to get into the fight against him and the USA has announced that gas would be the trigger. The jihadists know that, too.

There is some evidence that gas from Lybia went through Benghazi to the rebels. There is a history, too- some evidence that Uncle Sam supplied the gas or enabled the supplies to Saddam that he used against the Kurds. I know several Iraqi vets who claim that they found several large caches of nonradioactive WMD that were scooped up by contractors in large trucks and nothing was heard about them again. One said his captain said the English markings were American in origin. Maybe that's why Bush never claimed that WMD was found.

[PieterCasparzen]

I even question now the first Gulf War. Who cares about Kuwait anyway....They were side-drilling into Saddam’s oil fields. That war was about protecting our Saudi Masters.

Actually, it's quite the other way around. The Saudi Royal family is 100% dependent on and in bed with the financial oligarchy that rules the US behind the scenes.

For example, Saudi Intelligence is simply an arm of the CIA. The first head of it, Kamal Adham, was in bed up to his eyeballs with the CIA and a shareholder of it's infamous bank, BCCI.

[silverleaf]

incoherent babble much, troll?

Come back a month after obama attacks and tell us how it made the world safer, OK? Too much to ask?

[arthurus]

So the new standard is we allow use of WNDs?

Using World Net Daily against the Syrians would, indeed, be over the top.

[ricmc2175]

We have no money to have White House tours, we are cutting troop levels because we are out of money, but you tell me we have enough money to waste on an admittedly (by the administration) demonstration attack on Syria. That has never worked in military history. Fight or don't fight is the rule. If you fight, bring the entire tool box. Stepping into Islamic family disputes is always counter-indicated. Allowing barbarians to kill barbarians is always a preferred policy.