RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention

RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

kdsub -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (8/31/2013 4:22:45 PM)
AND while we are waiting for this world consensus Obama SHOULD be consulting Congress to see if America wants to participate in any military action. If they give permission fine if not let the UN handle it....or not. Butch

Lucylastic -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (8/31/2013 4:29:03 PM)
FR Congress doesnt come out of recess until sept 9... Its a long weekend, it will give you haters time to come up with more spin hes wrong, hes right, hes weak, hes arrogant, hes an amateur, hes a war monger, his peace prize should be returned, hes gonna get americans killed, fuck the ME< bomb em to glass, etc etc ad nauseam blah blah blah

kdsub -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (8/31/2013 4:34:37 PM)
Lucy the senate Democrats could call a session any time they choose... And why the you haters bit? You talk'n to me...YOU TALK'N TO ME Butch

Lucylastic -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (8/31/2013 4:42:38 PM)
no hon, it was a fast response, you have been pretty "steady" in your responses about this....[:)] the senate dems can call a session, but its not any good without the rest of the idiots is it, and by that I mean the house dems and both houses of republicans

TheHeretic -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (8/31/2013 5:40:39 PM)
Please, Lucy. I'm fascinated. Do go on. I can't wait see all the cheerleaders get started about how ya'll want the United States to be the World's Policeman, and why my country is obviously so much smarter about this than the UK. The civics gap is showing again, though. Holy crap! I might actually read a post or two by Tweak on this one.

MrBukani -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (8/31/2013 6:14:30 PM)
FR FYI it's ever so dandy to see countertactics are being picked up and handled according to the intended strategy.[&:]

Lucylastic -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (8/31/2013 6:33:26 PM)
you obviously aren't aware of my civics lessons Richie old boy. Where have I said that the US should be the policemen of the world..Canada or the UK wants any part of it..neither do I.....im as anti war as I have ever been, however I'm not unaware of the situation or the double speak. I don't see a win ...I don't see peace, I dont see fewer deaths. I dont wanna see my countrymen/women, either original or adopted being killed, I don't wanna see Americans die either...gasp I dont even wanna see Syrians, Muslims, Christians or Jews die. FUCK Me Im a terrible person. I'm just pointing out the bullshit you and your brethren are spouting SIMPLY because its Obamas turn to fuck with the ME on his own decision. I'm sick of death and destruction...and pointing out that people would and will condemn him for whatever he does. its already been said, If he doesn't strike he looks weak to "our" enemies....China, Russia, the ME, the Koreans...Its been hilarious to watch you all jump around using one excuse or another to attack dems. I dont think hes right. I dont think you are right...for what its worth. I dont have the answers, neither do you....I dont wanna see innocent people die, neither do you, I hope... But hope and reality have little to do with each other in this scenario. Go troll elsewhere.

TheHeretic -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (8/31/2013 7:50:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic FUCK Me Im a terrible person. I'm just pointing out the bullshit you and your brethren are spouting SIMPLY because its Obamas turn to fuck with the ME on his own decision. The second statement, a totally slimy accusation btw, does lend some credence to the first, Lucy... Planning to spend some time out from under the bridge with that shit? And don't be so vain. You are but one in a whole body of posters I was referring to, and eagerly await the contributions of.

MrBukani -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (8/31/2013 10:59:56 PM)
I wonder how Obi Wan Kenobi will gnaw his way out of the statements made. Maybe he will say he is anti-war and flowerpowerpeace duuuuuuude. Or some fine wikileakgate will disinform the public again. You never know do you?

Phydeaux -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (8/31/2013 11:04:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle No one seems to have noticed that it is in the US's interests (based on its current policy and current policy goals) for fighting in Syria to continue indefinitely. The US finds itself in the happy position of seeing 4 of its regional 'enemies' - Iran, Assad, Hezbollah and Al Quada - fighting each other in Syria. Coincidence? Serendipity? Or the outcome of a deliberate policy that seeks to destabilise and destroy Israel's opponents one by one? Recalling that US policy in the region is effectively made in Israel, not Washington, lends some weight to the last reason. So, a cynic could conclude that the last thing the US wants in Syria is peace. Viewed from his perspective, unilateral US intervention in Syria takes on a far more sinister hue. Cynics will note that possible US intervention is being proposed at a time when Assad' s forces seem to have gained a decisive superiority over the rebels. Is worth noting that previous reports of low scale chemical weapons use by the regime were ignored at the time. Was this because the situation on the ground was far more favourable to the rebels back then? Unilateral US intervention will almost certainly hand the Al Quada dominated rebels a significant boost, possibly restoring their lagging fortunes ...... In its likely form of missile attacks and air- and/or sea-launched bombing, it won't hand the rebels a decisive advantage, but might prove to be enough to restore a rough balance between the rebels and the regime ....... The above is not necessarily my view but it does provide food for thought ........ I could only wish we were so intelligent.... And Lucy, Obama isn't weak because of his policies. His policies suck because he's weak. Take, for example, this glorious situation in Syria. Obama could have intervened at the beginning. He could have sided with secular rebels and overthrown someone that supports Russia, Iran, hezbolla. He could have kept his mouth shut about chemical weapons being a red line. Really? What good is publishing a redline, except giving both parties a way of drawing us in. Instead.. here we are...

tweakabelle -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (8/31/2013 11:26:44 PM)
quote: I could only wish we were so intelligent.... And Lucy, Obama isn't weak because of his policies. His policies suck because he's weak. US policy towards the region is so close to bi-partisan ("across the aisle") that it doesn't matter who is in the White House. You need a more incisive analysis to identify the reason why the US is caught between a rock and a hard place.

popeye1250 -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (9/1/2013 12:03:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: I could only wish we were so intelligent.... And Lucy, Obama isn't weak because of his policies. His policies suck because he's weak. US policy towards the region is so close to bi-partisan ("across the aisle") that it doesn't matter who is in the White House. You need a more incisive analysis to identify the reason why the US is caught between a rock and a hard place. Tweak, we're in this position because of that dope in the W.H. You don't get involved in someone else's civil war.

Marini -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (9/1/2013 12:17:11 AM)
Don't forget to mention, that we spend days/weeks/months chatting about whether we should get involved in wars these days. We spend so long deciding, that it changes everything.

Politesub53 -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (9/1/2013 4:54:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Tweak, we're in this position because of that dope in the W.H. You don't get involved in someone else's civil war. Oh FFS, how many threads do I need to post this on. You are in this position due to Bush and Blair. If they hadnt lied about Iraq, Cameron would have won his vote last week, and action would have already started.

DsBound -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (9/1/2013 11:23:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Tweak, we're in this position because of that dope in the W.H. You don't get involved in someone else's civil war. Oh FFS, how many threads do I need to post this on. You are in this position due to Bush and Blair. If they hadnt lied about Iraq, Cameron would have won his vote last week, and action would have already started. Really? lol Let us move past years gone by (as much as they sucked) and deal with the issue today. That issue is we have no business getting involved in a civil war in Syria and the notion that it's even being considered is insane. Sure, it's horrible but it's a no win for our nation or this administration. What would the agenda be? You wonder why other countries see the US as the terrorists... because we try to police the world! Wait, wait... maybe Syria needs a new bank, Rothschilds? Honestly, I see no other reason the US would get involved.

popeye1250 -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (9/1/2013 11:49:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Tweak, we're in this position because of that dope in the W.H. You don't get involved in someone else's civil war. Oh FFS, how many threads do I need to post this on. You are in this position due to Bush and Blair. If they hadnt lied about Iraq, Cameron would have won his vote last week, and action would have already started. Oh? And what would Cameron have "won?" Some of the biggest anti-war advocates are those of us who've been in the military. Seems many on the left are all for this kind of thing, going to war provided of course that (they) aren't the ones who have to go. We really should ressurect "The Abraham Lincoln Brigade" in this country for those on the left who have the courage of their own convictions and will pick up a rifle and go marching off to things like this. In Europe you guys could have "The Don Quixote Brigade."

TheHeretic -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (9/1/2013 11:55:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 In Europe you guys could have "The Don Quixote Brigade." Isn't that the French?

Yachtie -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (9/1/2013 12:03:33 PM)
FR - As is often said, follow the money. Put another way, Cui Bono? Someone wants to get the United States into a war with Syria very, very badly. Cui bono is an old Latin phrase that is still commonly used, and it roughly means "to whose benefit?" The key to figuring out who is really behind the push for war is to look at who will benefit from that war. If a full-blown war erupts between the United States and Syria, it will not be good for the United States, it will not be good for Israel, it will not be good for Syria, it will not be good for Iran and it will not be good for Hezbollah. The party that stands to benefit the most is Saudi Arabia, and they won't even be doing any of the fighting.

Politesub53 -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (9/1/2013 12:06:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound Really? lol Let us move past years gone by (as much as they sucked) and deal with the issue today. That issue is we have no business getting involved in a civil war in Syria and the notion that it's even being considered is insane. Sure, it's horrible but it's a no win for our nation or this administration. What would the agenda be? You wonder why other countries see the US as the terrorists... because we try to police the world! Wait, wait... maybe Syria needs a new bank, Rothschilds? Honestly, I see no other reason the US would get involved. Only an idiot would suggest recent times have no bearing on current events.

DsBound -> RE: A conversation on Syrian intervention (9/1/2013 12:48:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound Really? lol Let us move past years gone by (as much as they sucked) and deal with the issue today. That issue is we have no business getting involved in a civil war in Syria and the notion that it's even being considered is insane. Sure, it's horrible but it's a no win for our nation or this administration. What would the agenda be? You wonder why other countries see the US as the terrorists... because we try to police the world! Wait, wait... maybe Syria needs a new bank, Rothschilds? Honestly, I see no other reason the US would get involved. Only an idiot would suggest recent times have no bearing on current events. Takes a zombie to consistently seek blame instead of seeing what can be done today. You can't rewrite history.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875