If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC News)   House Speaker John Boehner gives Obama the green light to start WWIII   (firstread.nbcnews.com) divider line 145
    More: Scary, Boehner, Wwiii, Obama, House Majority Leader, Eric Cantor, House Minority Leader  
•       •       •

12670 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Sep 2013 at 1:07 PM (45 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-09-03 11:59:37 AM
13 votes:
Will you f*cking stop it with this WWIII sh*t?
2013-09-03 12:02:38 PM
11 votes:
Of all the times that Congress could choose not to be partisan hacks.....
2013-09-03 12:01:20 PM
10 votes:
We've found the ONE THING Republicans will agree with Obama on. Killing...
2013-09-03 01:13:10 PM
9 votes:
img.fark.net
2013-09-03 01:20:24 PM
7 votes:
You will not get WWIII.  The apocalypse will not happen in your lifetime.  Your death will be a whimper and not a bang.  Deal with it.
2013-09-03 12:04:29 PM
7 votes:
You know...if the GOP wants to kill people in the middle east then maybe we should air drop the first born of every member of congress into Syria with a full combat load out and let them sort it out for us.
2013-09-03 12:30:29 PM
6 votes:

cameroncrazy1984: Weaver95: cameroncrazy1984: Bombing Iraq will start WWIII!
Bombing Afghanistan will start WWIII!
Bombing Libya will start WWIII!
I swear I see that wolf right over there!

Eventually someone is gonna start bombing us back.

Who? Syria? You kiddin me? You think Russia's gonna try something?


I'd rather not find out. We already lost the twin towers and a good bit of the 4th and 5th amendments...what else has to go boom here at home before people realize action have consequences?
2013-09-03 01:15:01 PM
5 votes:
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
2013-09-03 12:25:10 PM
5 votes:

cman: nekom: BravadoGT: nekom: Does he have the votes?  It would make him look pretty stupid if he said that and didn't.  Not that he hasn't made an ass of himself before

He'll get them.  Or not.  It doesn't matter--at this point, it's more about Obama's ego now, so it's going to happen.

Well, if you say you're going to do something then don't you do tend to lose credibility.  I wish I understood enough about the situation to have an opinion, I have no idea who or what to root for here, a Syria where children are NOT being killed is probably too much to ask for just yet, sadly.

This

Pretty much we're farked no matter what we do on it


So our solution to ending senseless killing is to...kill a bunch of people at random and hope that the heartless sons of biatches who have no souls running the syrian government are what...Gonna suddenly start behaving themselves?

The only thing we can do is make things worse.
2013-09-03 12:31:23 PM
4 votes:

cameroncrazy1984: I think you underestimate smart weapons. We're not sending B-52s into Laos, here.


Yeah, they've worked so will in Iraq.  No dead kids, no weddings blown up, nothing bad at all.  They're completely foolproof.
2013-09-03 12:26:05 PM
4 votes:

cameroncrazy1984: Bombing Iraq will start WWIII!
Bombing Afghanistan will start WWIII!
Bombing Libya will start WWIII!
I swear I see that wolf right over there!


Eventually someone is gonna start bombing us back.
2013-09-03 12:12:29 PM
4 votes:
Boehner couldn't deliver his own party on a farm bill. His word ain't shiat, and he's incompetent.
2013-09-03 05:39:17 PM
3 votes:
sphotos-a-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net
2013-09-03 04:13:55 PM
3 votes:

WippitGuud: So our choices are...

1. The US attacks Syria, takes out as much of their military power as they can, and civilians die.

or

2. The US does nothing, Syria keeps all of its military power, and civilians die.


So... what's option 3?


thedisorderofthings.files.wordpress.com
2013-09-03 02:40:19 PM
3 votes:

Weaver95: cameroncrazy1984: Weaver95: cameroncrazy1984: Bombing Iraq will start WWIII!
Bombing Afghanistan will start WWIII!
Bombing Libya will start WWIII!
I swear I see that wolf right over there!

Eventually someone is gonna start bombing us back.

Who? Syria? You kiddin me? You think Russia's gonna try something?

I'd rather not find out. We already lost the twin towers and a good bit of the 4th and 5th amendments...what else has to go boom here at home before people realize action have consequences?



I'm sure this is going to sound naive, but, isn't what this is about?  The action of Syria using CWs, banned by international law, have consequences, such as strategic military strikes by those who are capable (United States) with the intention of preventing CW attacks again?

Don't read into this as I'm for with a missle strike in Syra.  I'm skeptical.  I'd much prefer to have the evidence made public which shows beyond a reasonable doubt that Syria's government was responsible, and that the UN, or some sort of coalition beyond the United States, will be leading the strike vs. the United States going alone.

Seems like a bad decision no matter what we do, but I view it as two basic questions; 1) Do I trust the govenment has enough evidence that the Syrian goverment used CWs against their own people?, and 2) Do I think that those who have the capability to deter the use of CWs again have the responsibility to use that capability?

I haven't made up my mind, and I don't envy anyone that has to and has an influence over the decision.
2013-09-03 02:22:20 PM
3 votes:
Would be nice to have a president who doesn't suck Israel's dick for once.
2013-09-03 01:41:16 PM
3 votes:
Things I've learned in this thread:

Getting involved in WWII was a mistake

All wars are created equal

Farkers care more about which American is to blame for a war than they do about its cause

Democrats / Republicans 100% unconditionally support action in Syria depending on which party you ask
2013-09-03 01:31:20 PM
3 votes:
If only we'd put this much thought into Dubya's motivations regarding Iraq before sending so many of our young men and women to die there.
2013-09-03 01:19:06 PM
3 votes:

uber humper: In the last 100 years:

Republican President Wars:
Iraq
Afghanistan
Iraq 2: Electric Boogaloo
Grenada
Panama

Democrat President Wars:
WWI
WWII
Korea
Vietnam
Yugoslavia


FTFY
2013-09-03 01:12:34 PM
3 votes:
img32.imageshack.us
2013-09-03 01:03:53 PM
3 votes:

BravadoGT: Shostie: Will you f*cking stop it with this WWIII sh*t?

There are a LOT of proxies involved here.  If Syria/Hezbollah launch a deadly attack against Israel--what makes you so sure the USA and Russia will stay out of it?


Syria and Israel have fought several wars since Syria became a Soviet/Russian client, and each time resulted in Israeli aircraft doing victory loops around Damascus. Russia ain't done dick in any of them. The real question is what makes you think that THIS TIME it'll be different?
2013-09-03 12:25:57 PM
3 votes:

Weaver95: You know...if the GOP wants to kill people in the middle east then maybe we should air drop the first born of every member of congress into Syria with a full combat load out and let them sort it out for us.


Oh jeebus christ!!

Really?! You're putting this at the feet of the Republicans? The Democrat President says that he wants to do and that he's going to do it either way and somehow this is a Republican's war?!

The only way I would support this is if the President said he was going to do this either way, which I think he has. But I still believe that politics end at the water's edge. The President is going to do this. Either he can do this with Congress's blessing or without it. For the good of the nation I think we need to go to war with a whole and intact effort.
2013-09-03 12:09:47 PM
3 votes:

BravadoGT: nekom: Does he have the votes?  It would make him look pretty stupid if he said that and didn't.  Not that he hasn't made an ass of himself before

He'll get them.  Or not.  It doesn't matter--at this point, it's more about Obama's ego now, so it's going to happen.


I guess Obama's back to being an egomaniacle mastermind determined to destroy the planet.

When's he go back to being a stuffed suit puppet?
2013-09-03 12:01:44 PM
3 votes:

nekom: Does he have the votes?  It would make him look pretty stupid if he said that and didn't.  Not that he hasn't made an ass of himself before


He'll get them.  Or not.  It doesn't matter--at this point, it's more about Obama's ego now, so it's going to happen.
2013-09-03 10:16:39 PM
2 votes:

Don't Lag Me Bro: As a Canadian, I hope Congress does go for it. 100,000 people have died so far, and Syria's leader is using chemical weapons on his population. Surgical strikes on military targets and maybe one on his house.
Put in a peace keeping force, start elections, etc.

"I'm tired of being the nation who responds to atrocities with destruction. If Syria wants to behave like a child, we should act like a parent. Why are we not at least considering some non-deadly response? "
These people are slaughtering each other. With guns. You can't go in there, wave the white flag, and send someone who is behaving badly to time out. I agree you don't want to bomb randomly. Go for weapons and fuel. And if they are really bad, things like electricity.


Fine, you pay for your righteous indignation Candian fool. Otherwise, STFU.
2013-09-03 10:10:55 PM
2 votes:
sphotos-a-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net

Big Time
2013-09-03 09:58:27 PM
2 votes:
www.innerhappiness.com
2013-09-03 07:56:22 PM
2 votes:

Oerath: Especially given that the people are trying to say the GOP is better, when most of the listed Dem wars were wars I think we were right to get into.


55,000 dead americans in Vietnam and 33,686 american deaths in Korea would like a word with you and your justified bullshiat.
2013-09-03 03:05:46 PM
2 votes:

WippitGuud: So our choices are...

1. The US attacks Syria, takes out as much of their military power as they can, and civilians die.

or

2. The US does nothing, Syria keeps all of its military power, and civilians die.


So... what's option 3?


In a perfect world? We convince China & Russia to stop being assholes on the security counsel after the UN results come back in a damning way that suggests that Assad did indeed gas his own people. Then the Arab League, The United States, Turkey, and France put pressure on Syria while Russia talks Syria to at least give up its chemical weapons. In general a real solution will require Russia not being an asshole specifically, and multinational support.
2013-09-03 02:42:27 PM
2 votes:

jshine: bbfreak: Dear everyone comparing Syria to Iraq. You people are idiots. Also, this thread went downhill fast with the derp.

Yes, an unprovoked American attack on a Middle Eastern country predicated on WMDs: there's not a thread of similarity -- none at all.


machoprogrammer: bbfreak: Dear everyone comparing Syria to Iraq. You people are idiots. Also, this thread went downhill fast with the derp.

Yeah, helping out Al Qaeda linked rebels (by removing Saddam, thus giving them a place to go) was totally not what we did in Iraq.

I know, your team's guy is president now, so it is cool



jshine: bbfreak: Dear everyone comparing Syria to Iraq. You people are idiots. Also, this thread went downhill fast with the derp.

Yes, an unprovoked American attack on a Middle Eastern country predicated on WMDs: there's not a thread of similarity -- none at all.


Differences.

1: Syria actually has chemical weapons. Iraq not so much when we invaded them.

2: Syria's chemical weapons have NOTHING to do with Iraq's chemical weapons. Syria's chemical weapons were developed possibly with the help of Russia.

3: There isn't going to be any sort of ground war in Syria, it just isn't going to happen.

4: There is actual evidence that Syria's government used chemical weapons. The recently released French report is pretty interesting. Instead of the very weak/shoddy evidence constructed before the Iraq invasion.

Assad's sarin stockpiles, which the United States says were used in the Aug. 21 attack, reveal a "technological mastery" of chemical weapons, according to the French. The sarin is stored in binary form -- the two chemical precursors necessary to make the gas are kept separate and are only mixed immediately before use. This technological sophistication may be a key point when U.N. investigators release their report on the Damascus attack: If they find that the toxic agent used in the attack was an advanced form of sarin -- containing chemical stabilizers and dispersal agents -- the weapon will most likely have come from Syrian regime stockpiles.

French assessment rebuts claims that the Aug. 21 attack could have been the work of a rogue officer. France traces Syria's chemical weapons program to "Branch 450" of the innocuously named Center of Scientific Studies and Research, which Israel bombed in May. Only Assad and top members of his regime, the report says, have authority to order the branch to employ its deadly weapons. Nor does the report give credence to the idea of a rogue element within Branch 450 itself: The unit, it says, is "composed solely of Alawite military personnel ... [and] distinguished by a high level of loyalty to the regime."


5: The Arab League even wants something done about it. Granted, they want UN intervention but that isn't going to happen as long as Russia & China have national interests in Syria.

Now, I'm not saying we should strike Syria. I am highly skeptical of the use of military force in this situation but I do think in essence saying that Iraq & Syria are the same situations is disingenuous.
2013-09-03 02:36:56 PM
2 votes:
The best part of this action against Syria is the morons comparing it to Iraq, who supported Iraq, defended Bush, insisted there WMDs in Iraq, thought it was a good idea to invade Afghanistan from a President with nothing but false pretenses and failure to actually kill the terrorist leader. These same people who would be calling Obama a pussy if he chose to do nothing, who has bipartisan support and will take action in the appropriate way, with minimal bodies on the ground, who was able to kill the leader of the 9/11 terrorist plot.

Keep calling it WWIII and keep trying to cover for one of the worst presidents in American history with false equivilence. I expect no less than abjuct hypocrisy, deflection, and projection from you all.
2013-09-03 01:51:39 PM
2 votes:
How is this our problem?
Yes, using poison gas is bad, but so is shelling an apartment building. Both sides are assholes, nether side will become a nice western democracy with walmart and reality tv so who cares. No matter what we do they are going to hate us do fark it lets just save the money and the cruse missiles.

/Mr. Obama we the American people respect the size of your penis, it is much bigger than Mr. Assad's. Please put it back in your pants and quit waving it around its frightening the children.
2013-09-03 01:49:48 PM
2 votes:
Dear everyone comparing Syria to Iraq. You people are idiots. Also, this thread went downhill fast with the derp.
2013-09-03 01:49:45 PM
2 votes:
I for one see no point in getting involved - we have enough problems at home we need to spend money on first before we throw it away on a country with no relation to us at all.

Here's the official whitehouse.gov petition against the war:  https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/no-war-syria/QcTV4m0F
2013-09-03 01:37:03 PM
2 votes:

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: keepitcherry: Take off the partisan blinders - how is Obama any different than Bush was? How can people STILL support this guy?

I can think of one, very superficial difference that means a lot to a lot of people....


The fact that Obama actually gets a case that isn't based on a source called Curveball comes to mind.
2013-09-03 01:35:00 PM
2 votes:
Take off the partisan blinders - how is Obama any different than Bush was? How can people STILL support this guy?
2013-09-03 01:33:33 PM
2 votes:

BravadoGT: cman: uber humper: In the last 100 years:

Republican President Wars:
Iraq
Afghanistan
Iraq 2: Electric Boogaloo
Grenada
Panama

Democrat President Wars:
WWI
WWII
Korea
Vietnam
Yugoslavia


FTFY

"Grenada?"  I've seen fights at football games that were longer and more bloody...


Odd - more American soldiers died in Grenada than in Yugoslavia. Yet you're not being defensive about Yugoslavia for some reason.
2013-09-03 01:30:25 PM
2 votes:

indarwinsshadow: [www.washingtonsblog.com image 850x1020]


Same war monger, different decade.


www.bitlogic.com
2013-09-03 01:27:43 PM
2 votes:
Obama got himself in way over his head with his "red line", then went to the UN and Congress hoping they'd give him a face-saving out.

Looks like the Republicans are just tossing the ball back in his court.

If we're going to go after people who poison children, I think we should start with Bayer, Dow and Monsanto. If it's corrupt regimes we're after, we should bomb Detroit, Chicago and New Orleans.
2013-09-03 01:27:25 PM
2 votes:
i.dawn.com
Shocking.
2013-09-03 01:26:50 PM
2 votes:
I said this in the last Syria thread, but I'm so annoyed by this drumbeat of inevitability that I'm going to re-post.

Turn whatever evidence you have over to the UN and let China & Russia pretend it doesn't exist. That's it. Let history judge them.

Meanwhile, use all of our fancy stealth tech to carpet-bomb Syria, regime & rebel areas alike, with medical supplies & food. Make like Syria's borders don't even exist. If you really must blow something up, target aircraft or AA sites that threaten the food drops. Cap it off by throwing a few million at construction & services to the Syrian refugee camps.

Completely disregarding Syria's sovereignty make Assad look powerless, while any kind of military strike he survives will just make him look stronger.It's a clear answer, which should save face re: Obama's "red line", and such an approach should sail through congress. If the UN and Arab States want to biatch about 'unilateral action' or colonialism, let them; it'll come off as completely ridiculous. And hell, in the end, we might actually help a kid or two.

I'm tired of being the nation who responds to atrocities with destruction. If Syria wants to behave like a child, we should act like a parent. Why are we not at least considering some non-deadly response?
2013-09-03 01:24:17 PM
2 votes:
www.washingtonsblog.com


Same war monger, different decade.
2013-09-03 01:24:00 PM
2 votes:
24.media.tumblr.com
2013-09-03 01:21:34 PM
2 votes:
It's all so sudden, it's like it came out of nowhere.

Tony Blair write in his memoir, 'A Journey,' that former Vice President Dick Cheney wanted to remake the Middle East after 9/11, and invade not only Iraq, but Iran and Syria as well. September 5, 2010

Dick was always absolutely hard-line on these things," Blair said. "I mean, I think he would openly avow this."

In his book, Blair writes Cheney wanted to deliver a message to nations he felt were supporting terrorists and terror organizations.


"He was for hard, hard power," he wrote. "No ifs, no buts, no maybes. We're coming after you so change or be changed."
2013-09-03 01:16:43 PM
2 votes:
In the last 100 years:

Republican President Wars:
Iraq
Afghanistan

Democrat President Wars:
WWI
WWII
Korea
Vietnam
2013-09-03 01:04:16 PM
2 votes:

R.A.Danny: Of all the times that Congress could choose not to be partisan hacks.....


Of there's one thing you can count on our GOP Congress to do, it's let us all down time and time again.
2013-09-03 12:40:13 PM
2 votes:

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Weaver95: Well the article DOES talk about the GOP so...yeah, I guess it's fair to call them out on this issue.

Well the article calls out Democrats as well, but no mention of this being a Democrats' war?

Per normal the Republicans can't get their shiat together and the Democrats are going to get their way, much to the detriment of the American people.


Um...you do realize the GOP wants this war, right? Looks like both parties want to keep blowing shiat up. So here we are, bipartisan cooperation at last. Ain't we lucky?
2013-09-03 12:26:32 PM
2 votes:

Weaver95: kill a bunch of people at random


I think you underestimate smart weapons. We're not sending B-52s into Laos, here.
2013-09-03 12:24:50 PM
2 votes:
Bombing Iraq will start WWIII!
Bombing Afghanistan will start WWIII!
Bombing Libya will start WWIII!
I swear I see that wolf right over there!
2013-09-03 12:15:11 PM
2 votes:

Shostie: Will you f*cking stop it with this WWIII sh*t?


Given Russia's aggressive posturing over the whole thing, the Israel angle, the numerous other conflicts that are ongoing in the region, this is not exactly a far-fetched possibility.  It's not nearly as "simple" as Iraq was as far as geopolitical alignments are involved.

That said, WWIII this is unlikely to become.  I think it would be more likely to happen if AQ got their hands on a large amount of chemical weapons as we'd see their attacks become a lot more devastating and see a much worse response from the first world.
2013-09-03 12:05:38 PM
2 votes:

Sliding Carp: mediablitz: We've found the ONE THING Republicans will agree with Obama on. Killing...

Oh, they'll be against it as soon as the pictures of dead kids in rubble show up.


Depends on whether the kids are brown or not.  If not, it'll be a "horrible tragedy."  If so, it'll be "collateral damage" that, while regrettable, is a necessary component of bringing freedom to the ignorant savages.
2013-09-03 12:02:40 PM
2 votes:

mediablitz: We've found the ONE THING Republicans will agree with Obama on. Killing...


Oh, they'll be against it as soon as the pictures of dead kids in rubble show up.
rka
2013-09-04 03:09:54 AM
1 votes:

Don't Lag Me Bro: As a Canadian, I hope Congress does go for it. 100,000 people have died so far, and Syria's leader is using chemical weapons on his population. Surgical strikes on military targets and maybe one on his house.
Put in a peace keeping force, start elections, etc.


As an American, I hope Canada realizes that they are led by a bunch of cowards.

Have the farking balls to step up or have the balls to say "not our problem". Canada's stance is the stance of cowards. You want to be on the side of victory by voicing moral support to the US while at the same damn time you want to be in a position where you are able to point at the US in the event of failure and go "Hey, wasn't me!". I'd quote a Rush lyric here but anything Canadian in this thread just makes me want to vomit.

You should be ashamed Canada. I don't even particularly care what side of the argument you pick. Just have the stones to actually pick one.
2013-09-04 12:21:25 AM
1 votes:

Weaver95: You know...if the GOP wants to kill people in the middle east then maybe we should air drop the first born of every member of congress into Syria with a full combat load out and let them sort it out for us.

President Trayvon would not be happy.

2013-09-03 09:57:34 PM
1 votes:
www.innerhappiness.com
2013-09-03 09:56:55 PM
1 votes:

Don't Lag Me Bro: As a Canadian, I hope Congress does go for it. 100,000 people have died so far, and Syria's leader is using chemical weapons on his population. Surgical strikes on military targets and maybe one on his house.
Put in a peace keeping force, start elections, etc.

"I'm tired of being the nation who responds to atrocities with destruction. If Syria wants to behave like a child, we should act like a parent. Why are we not at least considering some non-deadly response? "
These people are slaughtering each other. With guns. You can't go in there, wave the white flag, and send someone who is behaving badly to time out. I agree you don't want to bomb randomly. Go for weapons and fuel. And if they are really bad, things like electricity.


So write your elected representative and suggest that he commit Canadian forces to this. We'll you guys handle it.
2013-09-03 08:36:20 PM
1 votes:

Kit Fister: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Oerath: Especially given that the people are trying to say the GOP is better, when most of the listed Dem wars were wars I think we were right to get into.

55,000 dead americans in Vietnam and 33,686 american deaths in Korea would like a word with you and your justified bullshiat.

This. And the biggest problem with Viet Nam? The farking french got us into it.


JFK was without question the single most failed president this country has ever seen.
2013-09-03 05:07:07 PM
1 votes:

Isitoveryet: i wrote my game plan up thread & it doesn't involve blindly launching into Syria.
I understand the concern since when has the U.S. managed some sort of constraint when using military force? that said, what you wrote isn't anything i would ever support.


What you wrote is to destroy the CW caches and methods of delivery. The problem with this is target identification, collateral damage, and the fact that Syria has some sort of anti-aircraft capabilities that would need to be destroyed. You also said we notify the public before we strike our target. Do you not see the flaw in this plan? Do you really think that they would keep their CW in place if warned of an attack ahead of time in the area? What if these were stored in a public area? Your entire plan advocates destroying the weapons via bombing runs. It isn't that simple for one, to accomplish your plan and two you are naive if you think that destroying these assets is going to fix anything but ensure those weapons are not used against the populace.
2013-09-03 04:59:57 PM
1 votes:

Rapmaster2000: paygun: Rapmaster2000: Assad gassed his OWN PEOPLE!  He is a friend of Iran, our nation's sworn enemy.  He is an Islamofascist coming to Islamofascisize us.

I stand with our COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF in the face of tyranny, while you coddle these criminals.

I'll pray for you.

This is fun and all but seriously I do hope Obama kills lots of brown people.  Hope and change.

I legitimately think that we'll consider them white people in 40 years.  The Persians will be first.  Then the Arabs.  The Turks are already there.


Yeah, but we sorta backslid with Latinos.  They don't get to be white anymore thanks to Zimmerman.
2013-09-03 04:55:13 PM
1 votes:

Nemo's Brother: Worked great for Clinton when he was bombing aspirin factories.


Until the guys that he pissed off because of it flew some planes into buildings that is.
2013-09-03 04:53:32 PM
1 votes:

Nappy Imus: Interesting article about the motivations on going to war with Syria I came across. . .

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-09-01/guest-post-who-benefits-war -b etween-united-states-and-syria


So the Saudis gave CW to idiot rebels knowing they would blow up in their faces making it look like it was an attack ON the rebels not a fumbled attack BY the rebels so the US would be forced to attack their enemy.

Sneaky bastards. What next? Attacking a US city in order to encourage the US to enter into two long wars with their other enemies in the region?  Oh wait...
2013-09-03 04:49:53 PM
1 votes:

p the boiler: Just loving Free Republics response to anything related to this topic:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3061974/posts
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3062065/posts
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3062064/posts
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3062079/posts
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3062013/posts

They don't know which way is up right now


I got a newsflash for you Einstein. Neither do the idiots in the White House or Congress.
2013-09-03 04:42:22 PM
1 votes:

Turbo Cojones: Could someone explain to me why this is important to the average US citizen?

Thanks


the average US citizen is concerned with Miley Cyrus right now
2013-09-03 04:21:35 PM
1 votes:

Isitoveryet: rka: Linux_Yes: if Obama can do surgical strikes with no american boots on the ground, they i support it.  if not, then no.  but to do nothing sends the wrong message to the world's terrorist/idiots.  hey, i can spray sarin and no one is going to do anything.


What if you can't stop the chemical weapons without boots on the ground?

Your position is that you don't support boots on the ground.

So you advocate doing nothing, therefore sending the wrong message.

If Chemical Weapons are worth stopping, then they are worth boots on the ground.

You don't get to half-ass these scenarios. You're either in or you're not.

/I'm not


I believe we are capable of delivering our message without putting a single boot in the ground.


Worked great for Clinton when he was bombing aspirin factories.
2013-09-03 04:09:57 PM
1 votes:

Isitoveryet: dmaestaz: I guess Obama is going for his second Nobel Peace Prize by bombing the shiat out of another country now...

what was the first country?


You know all this foolishness is very amusing - and Obama is a big boy, and can take can of himself - and if people want to say mean things about him, that's fine with me.
But people who are calling this crap "Obama's foreign policy" are either very, very young, or very stupid.
I'm 63 years old, and what we are seeing now is basically our foreign policy - the only one we've had as long as I've been alive.
Bluster about some shiat going on in some benighted shiathole. When some pretext occurs, bomb and invade said shiathole.
Then, keep troops and/or payoff money in place forever to keep perpetual powder keg from blowing. And just keep adding more and more to the list. Started with Truman and Korea, never stopped.
Maybe if y'all really, REALLY decide you don't like it, you could stop it - but the deluded self-image we took away from WWII still looms large in a lot of American minds.
2013-09-03 03:45:57 PM
1 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: Did you ever wonder why 'a former constitutional professor and former civil rights lawyer' was never a professor of anything or never tried a case as a lawyer?   Did you ever wonder why 'a former constitutional professor' ignores congress at will, or somehow didn't know that obamacare was a tax?Did you ever wonder why 'a former constitutional professor and former civil rights lawyer' has no record of being EITHER ONE, and his entire academic career has been wiped/scraped clean so that no one can see it? Did you wonder why Princess Moochelle (before she was crowned Queen) got a $300,000 a year no-show job at a Chicago hospital system?  Did you ever wonder... about the world outside of your little bubble?


Here's your answers. 12 years lecturing but not as an instructor, 5 years as a counsel and not a trial lawyer, his personal preference for privacy of academic record.  As for Michelle's job at Chicago Medical Center, you need to check your facts instead of relying on a FWD:FWD:FWD:.  I've already asked why on these questions and sought answers, this is what's called living outside of my bubble.  Something you should also consider since you are quick to dispense this advice.
2013-09-03 03:32:05 PM
1 votes:
2013-09-03 03:22:48 PM
1 votes:

justtray: darth_badger: LasersHurt: darth_badger: And the CIA knows who they are working with. That's what makes it evil.

To be clear, you think we are specifically and knowingly arming AQ and the MB?

Yes.

Alex Jones' website is missing it's village idiot.


I'm sure we can help you find your way back, do you have a tag or something with your name on it?
2013-09-03 03:22:42 PM
1 votes:

cameroncrazy1984: doubled99: Will you f*cking stop it with this WWIII sh*t


Why? getting nervous?

About what? What in history makes you believe that THIS time will be different?


Russia?
2013-09-03 03:19:24 PM
1 votes:

Rapmaster2000: Neighborhood Watch: muck1969: Did you ever wonder why a former constitutional professor and former civil rights lawyer would defend NSA's domestic spying?  It's contradictory.


Did you ever wonder why 'a former constitutional professor and former civil rights lawyer' was never a professor of anything or never tried a case as a lawyer?  Did you ever wonder why 'a former constitutional professor' ignores congress at will, or somehow didn't know that obamacare was a tax?

Did you ever wonder why 'a former constitutional professor and former civil rights lawyer' has no record of being EITHER ONE, and his entire academic career has been wiped/scraped clean so that no one can see it?

Did you wonder why Princess Moochelle (before she was crowned Queen) got a $300,000 a year no-show job at a Chicago hospital system?


Did you ever wonder... about the world outside of your little bubble?

Don't forget all of those lobsters and caviar and champagne.  That's the kind of food rich people eat!

[i80.photobucket.com image 298x486]


I love how there are still people out there who believe that the president or his wife personally sign for room service.
2013-09-03 03:07:48 PM
1 votes:

muck1969: Did you ever wonder why a former constitutional professor and former civil rights lawyer would defend NSA's domestic spying?  It's contradictory.



Did you ever wonder why 'a former constitutional professor and former civil rights lawyer' was never a professor of anything or never tried a case as a lawyer?  Did you ever wonder why 'a former constitutional professor' ignores congress at will, or somehow didn't know that obamacare was a tax?

Did you ever wonder why 'a former constitutional professor and former civil rights lawyer' has no record of being EITHER ONE, and his entire academic career has been wiped/scraped clean so that no one can see it?

Did you wonder why Princess Moochelle (before she was crowned Queen) got a $300,000 a year no-show job at a Chicago hospital system?


Did you ever wonder... about the world outside of your little bubble?
2013-09-03 03:02:13 PM
1 votes:

BravadoGT: Shostie: Will you f*cking stop it with this WWIII sh*t?

There are a LOT of proxies involved here.  If Syria/Hezbollah launch a deadly attack against Israel--what makes you so sure the USA and Russia will stay out of it?


Because it would not even be remotely in Russia's interest to start a war. Their military has been in shambles for decades. Their ability to project power outside their borders is severely limited. Their economy could not sustain a foreign war for very long, especially one with the entirety of NATO. Putin is a kleptocratic thug, but he's not crazy and he's not stupid. He wants power and wealth. Having Russia bombed back into the stone age accomplishes neither of those goals.

What on earth makes you think Russia would go to war with NATO over Syria? That's the question you should be asking yourself. Sure, Russia likes having Syria as someone to sell their weapons to, but Russia isn't exactly doing to spend money and blood to continue to receive a tiny fraction of the amount that a war would cost.
2013-09-03 02:57:55 PM
1 votes:
...between the red line and the If I have a son he'd be Trayvon speeches, Obama is not quite the great orator many thought him to be.
2013-09-03 02:55:53 PM
1 votes:
Boehner has now officially come out of the closet as a RINO.
2013-09-03 02:54:15 PM
1 votes:

Lt. Cheese Weasel: How can they all be this fargin' stupid?


Because the voters tend to vote "Team" and not "Intelligence". This is the end result of that.
2013-09-03 02:52:57 PM
1 votes:

darth_badger: LasersHurt: darth_badger: And the CIA knows who they are working with. That's what makes it evil.

To be clear, you think we are specifically and knowingly arming AQ and the MB?

Yes.


Alex Jones' website is missing it's village idiot.
2013-09-03 02:49:10 PM
1 votes:

Headso: vygramul: BravadoGT: you seem certain we will be able to just bomb them and walk away without any recourse.  That's cute!

History doesn't suggest otherwise.

/I imagine you meant something other than "recourse"

[whitenoiseinsanity.com image 750x499]


I'm not seeing rebel leaders being invited to the Obama White House.
2013-09-03 02:47:40 PM
1 votes:
Tip for the anti-war side: make the effort to show at least a modicum of sympathy towards the innocent people being gassed and burned to death. When you ignore that and only respond with bumper sticker slogans, you come off as offensive as gun nuts that don't care about innocent shooting victims.
2013-09-03 02:43:55 PM
1 votes:
img.photobucket.com

img.photobucket.com
2013-09-03 02:40:33 PM
1 votes:
This thread is dildos.

Actually, this whole argument is dildos. Specifically, it's dildos who dumbly cheered Bush into Iraq without thinking and now somehow seem to believe that they can make up for it by doing a complete 180 on Syria even though it's pretty much exactly what SHOULD have happened in Iraq if Iraq really had WMDs like... you know.... Syria does.

/ dildos everywhere
2013-09-03 02:35:00 PM
1 votes:

vygramul: BravadoGT: you seem certain we will be able to just bomb them and walk away without any recourse.  That's cute!

History doesn't suggest otherwise.

/I imagine you meant something other than "recourse"


whitenoiseinsanity.com
2013-09-03 02:34:24 PM
1 votes:
The differences between Bush and Obama is pretty  black and white.
2013-09-03 02:24:51 PM
1 votes:

ManateeGag: Shostie: Will you f*cking stop it with this WWIII sh*t?

no, Obama's bombing someone, so it's WWIII and we're all going to be nuked!


Iraq and Afghanistan weren't backed by Russia and China.
2013-09-03 02:24:43 PM
1 votes:
Please someone stand up and stop these fools.
2013-09-03 02:19:13 PM
1 votes:

Phinn: I'm still waiting to hear what Cindy Sheehan has to say.


Where is your god now
2013-09-03 02:18:19 PM
1 votes:

I_C_Weener: Frozboz: Ok so what do we ordinary Americans need to do for this war?  Can I use my old yellow magnetic "support the troops" ribbon on the back of my SUV, or should I buy a new one?  What's the protocol here?

I was all for trading anti-war and pro-war signs with the libs of Fark, but no one took me seriously.  I've got lots of signs.  Only used twice.


people for this are not "libs" they are Obama apologists.
2013-09-03 02:16:08 PM
1 votes:

I_C_Weener: Linux_Yes: at least Obama is doing it the right way.  getting the CONgress to own up and do its job and make some decisions/ take some responsibility and follow the Constitution.  if uncle george was in there, he'd be busting missile caps on Syrian ass.  he wouldn't worry about any Constitution. why should he, he's from Texass.

Congress authorized the war in Iraq.  After he asked.  In fact, every member of Congress that gave him that power abdicated their duty under the Constitution.  But, you know, making up facts is fun.



yea, after the smokescreen of 'yea we know for a fact sadam has WMD's'    that turned out to be GOP Propaganda to get ole' George and the CONgress to pull the trigger.

nice try, though.
2013-09-03 02:16:06 PM
1 votes:
And here we go, yet again.

www.zahal.org
2013-09-03 02:14:57 PM
1 votes:

StopLurkListen: If one uses these types of weapons, the international community needs to respond in a way that lets the aggressor know in no uncertain terms that there will be a price. Hopefully that price makes it not worth using those weapons in the first place.


The "international community" already has made it clear they don't care, so why is it up to America to get involved unilaterally.
2013-09-03 02:14:09 PM
1 votes:
Once Obama utters the "I don't do what's popular, I do what's right" statement his transformation will be complete.
2013-09-03 02:11:21 PM
1 votes:
Chemical and biological weapons are in a special class for a reason. They are not decisive militarily. Troops tend to be hardened targets. Civilians are far more at risk. Plus, containment is difficult to impossible. Civilians far away and in the future may be in danger long after and far from the battlefield. Bombs and bullets only kill once, and while mistakes can be made, the risk is mostly over once the trigger is pulled.

If one uses these types of weapons, the international community needs to respond in a way that lets the aggressor know in no uncertain terms that there will be a price. Hopefully that price makes it not worth using those weapons in the first place.

It's not about sides, it's about discouraging anyone from ever using these weapons.
2013-09-03 02:06:56 PM
1 votes:
ITT: Rational people versus People who are not in the military yet expect people who are in the military to accept budget cuts, benefit reductions while putting their lives on the line for unfounded nonsensical rumors based on intelligence as reliable as yellowcake reports in the Bush admin in a country we have absolutely zero stake in to defend a country that repeatedly mocks us and refers to us as cattle.

Did I miss anything?
2013-09-03 02:02:03 PM
1 votes:

LasersHurt: jshine: bbfreak: Dear everyone comparing Syria to Iraq. You people are idiots. Also, this thread went downhill fast with the derp.

Yes, an unprovoked American attack on a Middle Eastern country predicated on WMDs: there's not a thread of similarity -- none at all.

There isn't, when you stop ignoring all of the crucial details. But you knew that.


Similarity and equality are different concepts.  Of course if one looks closely enough at details, there will be differences.  Iraq is not Syria (they're spelled differently and have different borders), but that doesn't mean that the two situations share nothing in common.

In both cases, there's likely to be sectarian nastiness after we depose the dictator -- who, in both cases, is from a minority in the country in question (Alawite/Syria or Sunni/Iraq -- take your pick).  ...so we'll end up trading one murderous bastard for thousands of murderous bastards who'll go on yet another rampage of sectarian violence & ethnic cleansing.
2013-09-03 02:02:00 PM
1 votes:
4.bp.blogspot.com
2013-09-03 02:00:22 PM
1 votes:

bbfreak: Dear everyone comparing Syria to Iraq. You people are idiots. Also, this thread went downhill fast with the derp.


Yeah, helping out Al Qaeda linked rebels (by removing Saddam, thus giving them a place to go) was totally not what we did in Iraq.

I know, your team's guy is president now, so it is cool
2013-09-03 01:55:54 PM
1 votes:

freak7: CynicalLA: When do you ship out?

My old ass has done my time. Honestly, I'd reenlist today if they'd have me, but I'm too old to go back in. Civilian life sucks a fat one compared to the excitement of being in the military.


If you need excitement you should fark a bear, but don't advocate yet another futile war in the middle east.
2013-09-03 01:53:33 PM
1 votes:
Cool, the one time the republicans and the democrats can come together is to get involved in yet another idiotic military operation
2013-09-03 01:52:28 PM
1 votes:

LasersHurt: darth_badger: I for one welcome our New World Order corporate banker overlords.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Full Retard has been engaged.


The USA funding Al Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood "protesters" is more retarded .
2013-09-03 01:48:44 PM
1 votes:

Kit Fister: What should be bombed, and to what degree?


I'd start with things like missile delivery systems, radar and communication stations. After that, we'll see if Assad chills. If he pulls any more shiat, go after every tank, plane, and military target you can find. Oh and his palace, level that too.
2013-09-03 01:46:45 PM
1 votes:
obama is a piece of shiat
2013-09-03 01:43:32 PM
1 votes:

George Babbitt: cman: uber humper: In the last 100 years:

Republican President Wars:
Iraq
Afghanistan
Iraq 2: Electric Boogaloo
Grenada
Panama

Democrat President Wars:
WWI
WWII
Korea
Vietnam
Yugoslavia


FTFY

Who gets credit for the Cold War?


War on Drugs anyone?
2013-09-03 01:42:18 PM
1 votes:

I_C_Weener: Confabulat: Deep Contact: We'll just say you were responsible for the chemical attack.
How'd you like the shrimp?

I don't understand the supposed scandal here. What am I missing?

Remember when?


CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran
The U.S. knew Hussein was launching some of the worst chemical attacks in history -- and still gave him a hand.
2013-09-03 01:41:46 PM
1 votes:

cameroncrazy1984: jjorsett: groppet: Obama should have never give that "Don't cross this line" BS about the use of chemical weapons. Well they caled his bluff and made him look bad in front of his woman, so now he has to cut a motherfarker. All I wonder is will it be a "symbolic" bombing where a few radar stations, bridges a airfield or two are bombed. Or will they go after the chemical weapon stockpiles.

/would rather not be involved

They'll at least flatten some empty government office buildings after notifying the Syrians that those are our targets. That'll show 'em.

Ah, yet another person whose entire foreign-policy experience comes from watching The West Wing.


Actually, it was from watching Bill Clinton, scourge of Middle Eastern janitors.
2013-09-03 01:41:36 PM
1 votes:

I_C_Weener: Confabulat: Deep Contact: We'll just say you were responsible for the chemical attack.
How'd you like the shrimp?

I don't understand the supposed scandal here. What am I missing?

[believeinreason.com image 460x288]

Remember when?


Yes, because Syria is EXACTLY like Iraq. Except Syria was/is backed by Russia instead of the US and got its chemical weapons from Russia. While in Iraq the west helped with their WMD program/encouraged it. Plus Kerry was a senator during that photo, not part of any administration. I am skeptical of striking Syria as anyone, but comparing Syria and Iraq doesn't add up when you look at the facts. Those are two completely different situations.
2013-09-03 01:41:18 PM
1 votes:

Electrify: So since Republican House Speaker John Boehner is siding with Obama on this one, does this mean we can add him to the "list of people who are conspiring against the GOP and therefore America?"


If those two people actually agree on something it must be the crappiest idea ever crapped out of any craphole.

More bullshiat media theater.
More idiots eating it up.
2013-09-03 01:41:09 PM
1 votes:
Are we trusting the Syrian rebels (Al Qaeda) to give us intel on where to bomb?

This plan may have some flaws in it.
2013-09-03 01:40:08 PM
1 votes:

Shostie: Will you f*cking stop it with this WWIII sh*t?


Seriously.
2013-09-03 01:39:56 PM
1 votes:

Heliovdrake: freak7: Heliovdrake: So, just to get it right here, you do or do not support bombing Syria?

100% in favor of.


Ok. Next.

What should be bombed, and to what degree?


HE just told you, Syria, 100%
2013-09-03 01:37:00 PM
1 votes:

keepitcherry: Take off the partisan blinders - how is Obama any different than Bush was? How can people STILL support this guy?


Are you high, or 14?
2013-09-03 01:36:13 PM
1 votes:

keepitcherry: Take off the partisan blinders - how is Obama any different than Bush was? How can people STILL support this guy?


I can think of one, very superficial difference that means a lot to a lot of people....
2013-09-03 01:33:34 PM
1 votes:

nekom: Does he have the votes?  It would make him look pretty stupid if he said that and didn't.  Not that he hasn't made an ass of himself before


Said what, that he'll "support" Obama? Note the quote: "I am going to support the president's call for action," he told reporters. "I believe my colleagues should support this call for action." That's not a guarantee, nor does it even say that Boehner is going to work for passage, it's a statement of Boehner's personal support. If Obama wants to get it passed, he'd better be doing some heavy-duty lobbying about now and not just sitting back waiting for somebody else to do the work.
2013-09-03 01:33:00 PM
1 votes:

Confabulat: Deep Contact: We'll just say you were responsible for the chemical attack.
How'd you like the shrimp?

I don't understand the supposed scandal here. What am I missing?


believeinreason.com

Remember when?
2013-09-03 01:27:50 PM
1 votes:

cameroncrazy1984: Bombing Iraq will start WWIII!
Bombing Afghanistan will start WWIII!
Bombing Libya will start WWIII!
I swear I see that wolf right over there!


A side track, but for what it's worth, The Boy Who Cried Wolf is a cautionary tale to both children, advocating not making light of grevious situations, and to parents, advocating taking a serious threat seriously, even if past actions suggest that the seriouness may be overplayed, or even non-existant.

It's the reason why first responders will always take a bomb threat seriously, even if the facility/location/caller has a history of making false claims.

So, being wrong on threat of WMD trageting Americans or our allies in Iraq does not mean we should ignore the potential future threat of chemical/biological/nuclear weapons being used against the US or its Allies.

Carry on.
2013-09-03 01:25:48 PM
1 votes:
We'll just say you were responsible for the chemical attack.
How'd you like the shrimp?
www.theblaze.com
2013-09-03 01:25:42 PM
1 votes:

mediablitz: We've found the ONE THING Republicans will agree with Obama on. Killing...


Obama: I want to bomb the crap out of Syria
GOP: We must stand against you. You know, it's sort of our thing.
Obama: But they used chemical weapons!
GOP: Yeah, but we really hate you!
Obama: If we don't follow through, we will lose credibility!
GOP: Sorry, we hate you more than we love our country.
Obama: Listen, I want to bomb BROWN people who aren't Christians!!!!
GOP:   Ohhhhh.  Why didn't you say so! That's a horse of a different color!!!!

images3.wikia.nocookie.net
2013-09-03 01:22:35 PM
1 votes:
I for one welcome our New World Order corporate banker overlords.
2013-09-03 01:20:01 PM
1 votes:

JusticeandIndependence: uber humper: In the last 100 years:

Republican President Wars:
Civil War
Iraq
Afghanistan

Democrat President Wars:
WWI
WWII
Korea
Vietnam

Yay Team!


You left one off the Republican ledger. Well, at least one.
2013-09-03 01:18:56 PM
1 votes:
Weird, democrats screaming for war and republicans screaming for peace.
How about instead of killing Syrians we kill politicians instead?
2013-09-03 01:18:15 PM
1 votes:
So since Republican House Speaker John Boehner is siding with Obama on this one, does this mean we can add him to the "list of people who are conspiring against the GOP and therefore America?"
2013-09-03 01:18:09 PM
1 votes:

uber humper: In the last 100 years:

Republican President Wars:
Iraq
Afghanistan

Democrat President Wars:
WWI
WWII
Korea
Vietnam


Yay Team!
2013-09-03 01:18:01 PM
1 votes:
How can they all be this fargin' stupid?
2013-09-03 01:17:24 PM
1 votes:

Shostie: Will you f*cking stop it with this WWIII sh*t?


^^^This.  This is more like the time we fought USSR in Afganistan and ended up arming a religious terrorist regime ang got a Rambo movie.
2013-09-03 01:17:24 PM
1 votes:

SuperNinjaToad: Ironic thing is most folks voted for Obama to stop wars not creating new ones.



It's only ironic if you were dumb enough to believe him.
2013-09-03 01:16:36 PM
1 votes:
This isn't WWIII.  WWIII doesn't start until July 14th, 2014 in the aftermath of the US winning the World Cup Final.
2013-09-03 01:15:34 PM
1 votes:
with Obama now having the boehner and the cantor attitude to strike that ASSad, I'm now 99.999% sure it will happen now.

Ironic thing is most folks voted for Obama to stop wars not creating new ones.
2013-09-03 01:09:55 PM
1 votes:
Yeah! Let's go Warbama!!! Where is your socialist peace god now,!?!?
2013-09-03 01:09:55 PM
1 votes:
Hey, bone head. You are the speaker of the house.
Not anyone important.
Shaddup and sit down, you farktwit.

Farking racist, sexist asshole.
2013-09-03 01:07:38 PM
1 votes:

cameroncrazy1984: Weaver95: cameroncrazy1984: Weaver95: cameroncrazy1984: Bombing Iraq will start WWIII!
Bombing Afghanistan will start WWIII!
Bombing Libya will start WWIII!
I swear I see that wolf right over there!

Eventually someone is gonna start bombing us back.

Who? Syria? You kiddin me? You think Russia's gonna try something?

I'd rather not find out. We already lost the twin towers and a good bit of the 4th and 5th amendments...what else has to go boom here at home before people realize action have consequences?

Give me a break with that crap, Weav. You know better.


I know that if we keep bombing the middle east then eventually things will blow up here at home.
2013-09-03 01:07:25 PM
1 votes:

vygramul: BravadoGT: Shostie: Will you f*cking stop it with this WWIII sh*t?

There are a LOT of proxies involved here.  If Syria/Hezbollah launch a deadly attack against Israel--what makes you so sure the USA and Russia will stay out of it?

Syria and Israel have fought several wars since Syria became a Soviet/Russian client, and each time resulted in Israeli aircraft doing victory loops around Damascus. Russia ain't done dick in any of them. The real question is what makes you think that THIS TIME it'll be different?


Russia knows that if they start messing with Israel they'll face a lot of trouble from us, and it isn't worth it.  Russia is driven by money these days, same as China, ideology takes a back seat to profit, and they know that if it comes down to it doing anything that risks direct military conflict with the US is very bad for their future earnings prospects.
2013-09-03 01:04:46 PM
1 votes:

Weaver95: cameroncrazy1984: Weaver95: kill a bunch of people at random

I think you underestimate smart weapons. We're not sending B-52s into Laos, here.

Smart weapons didn't get saddam. That came down to good old fashioned boots on the ground foot work. I very much doubt our booming runs would slow down the killing and violence in Syria. We are just going to make things worse.


To be fair, by the time we got around to finding Saddam it was just icing on a the cake, a nice a PR moment, but the Iraqi regime had been so thoroughly demolished that even if we'd never found him, he'd never have been relevant again.  We could have saved a ton of money in Iraq if we'd just hit it from above and through missile strikes, destroyed the military targets and infrastructure, and driven the Hussein family into hiding, and then let the Iraqis rebuild on their own.
2013-09-03 01:04:25 PM
1 votes:

Weaver95: Um...did you even bother to read the article...?


yes. Did you?

Boehner says he supports the President. Then it goes on to say how he is going to have to sell it to his fellow republicans who are against it. The reason I ask you if you read it is because you are under the misguided assumption that the GOP wants this war. Where did you get this information? Right now there are more GOP voices decrying military action then are cheer-leading the President.

Let me take a wild guess, you can see into their hearts and know they really really want to bomb Syria?
2013-09-03 01:02:40 PM
1 votes:

Shostie: Will you f*cking stop it with this WWIII sh*t?

2013-09-03 12:55:43 PM
1 votes:

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Weaver95: Um...you do realize the GOP wants this war, right? Looks like both parties want to keep blowing shiat up. So here we are, bipartisan cooperation at last. Ain't we lucky?

And you know the GOP wants this war because? Did you get the memo that I missed? Or is this just "well of course the GOP wants a war"?

Quick quiz who was the POTUS for World War I? WW2? Vietnam? Koren War? When you want a really big nasty war you got to vote Democrat.


Um...did you even bother to read the article...?
2013-09-03 12:53:45 PM
1 votes:

Weaver95: Um...you do realize the GOP wants this war, right? Looks like both parties want to keep blowing shiat up. So here we are, bipartisan cooperation at last. Ain't we lucky?


And you know the GOP wants this war because? Did you get the memo that I missed? Or is this just "well of course the GOP wants a war"?

Quick quiz who was the POTUS for World War I? WW2? Vietnam? Koren War? When you want a really big nasty war you got to vote Democrat.
2013-09-03 12:52:10 PM
1 votes:

nekom: Perhaps it will serve as a deterrent for further use of chemical weapons?


OOOOO I love playing Devil's Advocate!

Death penalty does not act as a deterrent because murderers gonna murder.

/Its not that I believe that statement.
//As I said, Devil's Advocate
2013-09-03 12:38:19 PM
1 votes:
I just can't see any way where bombing Syria works out well for anyone.
2013-09-03 12:33:40 PM
1 votes:

Weaver95: The only thing we can do is make things worse


^ This.
2013-09-03 12:33:25 PM
1 votes:

nekom: Well, isn't his job kind of to get his party to fall in line?


Not on this. This is Obama's thing. I think in this situation Boehner is basically just like any other Congressman, he has no special obligations other than letting it come to the floor.
2013-09-03 12:32:58 PM
1 votes:

cameroncrazy1984: Weaver95: kill a bunch of people at random

I think you underestimate smart weapons. We're not sending B-52s into Laos, here.


Smart weapons didn't get saddam. That came down to good old fashioned boots on the ground foot work. I very much doubt our booming runs would slow down the killing and violence in Syria. We are just going to make things worse.
2013-09-03 12:28:44 PM
1 votes:

nekom: Well, doesn't it make him look impotent?


I don't think so, but I don't really like these kinds of meta-questions anyways. Do you think it makes him weak? I don't - I believe in many things that would never pass the House, even if it was full of liberals like me. Doesn't make me weak, so why would that make him weak?
2013-09-03 12:27:16 PM
1 votes:

Weaver95: So our solution to ending senseless killing is to...kill a bunch of people at random and hope that the heartless sons of biatches who have no souls running the syrian government are what...Gonna suddenly start behaving themselves?


I have this slim hope that they have delayed because they have a good plan for nailing the chemical weapons without causeing much bloodshed.

SLIM hope.
2013-09-03 12:21:44 PM
1 votes:

nekom: Does he have the votes?  It would make him look pretty stupid if he said that and didn't.  Not that he hasn't made an ass of himself before


Why is it stupid to say the way he'll vote? There's no connection between his beliefs on the matter and whether or not the thing will pass.
2013-09-03 12:10:59 PM
1 votes:

nekom: BravadoGT: nekom: Does he have the votes?  It would make him look pretty stupid if he said that and didn't.  Not that he hasn't made an ass of himself before

He'll get them.  Or not.  It doesn't matter--at this point, it's more about Obama's ego now, so it's going to happen.

Well, if you say you're going to do something then don't you do tend to lose credibility.  I wish I understood enough about the situation to have an opinion, I have no idea who or what to root for here, a Syria where children are NOT being killed is probably too much to ask for just yet, sadly.


This

Pretty much we're farked no matter what we do on it
2013-09-03 12:04:21 PM
1 votes:

BravadoGT: nekom: Does he have the votes?  It would make him look pretty stupid if he said that and didn't.  Not that he hasn't made an ass of himself before

He'll get them.  Or not.  It doesn't matter--at this point, it's more about Obama's ego now, so it's going to happen.


Well, if you say you're going to do something then don't you do tend to lose credibility.  I wish I understood enough about the situation to have an opinion, I have no idea who or what to root for here, a Syria where children are NOT being killed is probably too much to ask for just yet, sadly.
2013-09-03 12:03:26 PM
1 votes:

Shostie: Will you f*cking stop it with this WWIII sh*t?


There are a LOT of proxies involved here.  If Syria/Hezbollah launch a deadly attack against Israel--what makes you so sure the USA and Russia will stay out of it?
 
Displayed 145 of 145 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report