Prove the US is lying about who used the chemical weapons on whom

tinfoil said:
Hmm... I keep seeing that "any less dead" question. Dying from chemical weapons would be painful and drawn out. An explosion might be a quicker and less painful way to go compared to chemical attacks. Bullets also might be more humane than chemicals.

I think I would honestly have to answer that there is a difference. Dying is "less dead" than dead.

I think it's time to retire that question. It's not making sense in my opinion.
The distinction comes down to suffering.
Click to expand...

I didn't say there wasn't a difference in the amount of suffering, the point was that the government killed 100k of its own citizens before the chem attack. Those people are not any less dead. The amount they suffered in death is irrelevant. The end result is that they still got killed by their government. If you care about the slaughter of innocents, it should not matter the means by which they are slaughtered.
 
evince said:
Is The Rand corporation who got elected to the presidency by the people?
Click to expand...

It's the same think that that says that terrorisn is best fought by law enforcement, not the military.

There was a time when you held antiwar beliefs yourself.

You should know that the only one of us who has changed is you.

My principles are not for sale.
 
What nation is the ONLY nation in world history to actually use nuclear weapons? .. Make that TWICE.

Does anyone believe that country wouldn't use them again if it wanted to .. international law be damned?
 
Progressive Change Campaign Committee Urges Congress To Vote 'No' On Syria

WASHINGTON -- A major progressive political action committee on Wednesday urged Democratic members of Congress to vote against any resolution authorizing airstrikes on Syria.

The nearly one million-member Progressive Change Campaign Committee circulated a memo to Democrats in the House and Senate spelling out its objections to the use of military force against Syrian President Bashar Assad, adding that PCCC members will make "thousands of calls to Congress and will make participate in local events" in the coming days to pressure lawmakers to oppose military action.

President Barack Obama has asked Congress to authorize airstrikes on Syrian army targets in response to Assad's alleged use of chemical weapons to kill more than 1,400 people on Aug. 21.

"You now face a decision that involves life and death," PCCC co-founders Adam Green and Stephanie Taylor wrote in the memo. "This decision also involves billions of dollars. And it will send a signal to your constituents and the world about our nation’s morals and our ability to make strategic, goal-oriented decisions."

The memo also includes the results of a survey PCCC conducted of its members over the past three days, showing that 73 percent oppose military action in Syria, 80 percent think "narrow military bombings will not achieve U.S. objectives," and 81 percent think the mission "will lead to deep involvement" in Syria's two year-old civil war, despite Obama's assurance that the scope of U.S. involvement will be limited.

The memo makes PCCC the latest in a string of political groups on both sides of the aisle to oppose the White House's request for military authorization. Heritage Action, the political arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation, also announced its opposition to the strikes Wednesday, and spokesman Dan Holler said it is "clear there is not a vital U.S. interest at stake" in the conflict.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/04/progressives-syria_n_3866286.html
 
blackascoal said:
Progressive Change Campaign Committee Urges Congress To Vote 'No' On Syria

WASHINGTON -- A major progressive political action committee on Wednesday urged Democratic members of Congress to vote against any resolution authorizing airstrikes on Syria.

The nearly one million-member Progressive Change Campaign Committee circulated a memo to Democrats in the House and Senate spelling out its objections to the use of military force against Syrian President Bashar Assad, adding that PCCC members will make "thousands of calls to Congress and will make participate in local events" in the coming days to pressure lawmakers to oppose military action.

President Barack Obama has asked Congress to authorize airstrikes on Syrian army targets in response to Assad's alleged use of chemical weapons to kill more than 1,400 people on Aug. 21.

"You now face a decision that involves life and death," PCCC co-founders Adam Green and Stephanie Taylor wrote in the memo. "This decision also involves billions of dollars. And it will send a signal to your constituents and the world about our nation’s morals and our ability to make strategic, goal-oriented decisions."

The memo also includes the results of a survey PCCC conducted of its members over the past three days, showing that 73 percent oppose military action in Syria, 80 percent think "narrow military bombings will not achieve U.S. objectives," and 81 percent think the mission "will lead to deep involvement" in Syria's two year-old civil war, despite Obama's assurance that the scope of U.S. involvement will be limited.

The memo makes PCCC the latest in a string of political groups on both sides of the aisle to oppose the White House's request for military authorization. Heritage Action, the political arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation, also announced its opposition to the strikes Wednesday, and spokesman Dan Holler said it is "clear there is not a vital U.S. interest at stake" in the conflict.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/04/progressives-syria_n_3866286.html
Click to expand...


clearly you won't support Obama because you hate black people...
 
blackascoal said:
We raise the specter of all out war to conduct a 'limited' strike that the UN says will be illegal .. a strike that will prove to be ineffective at best.

Where of where is all this so-called intelligence of Obama?

Bush was considered a dummy .. but the so-called brilliant Obama follows in the Bush footsteps.
Click to expand...


Yep... with Russia getting this feisty, I think Congress better deny Obama the ability to do something really stupid here. Especially if his 'plan' is to simply lob missiles at a few 'targets' and think that will 'help'
 
blackascoal said:
We raise the specter of all out war to conduct a 'limited' strike that the UN says will be illegal .. a strike that will prove to be ineffective at best.

Where of where is all this so-called intelligence of Obama?

Bush was considered a dummy .. but the so-called brilliant Obama follows in the Bush footsteps.
Click to expand...

to be clear... I don't give a fuck what the UN says. Russia will block us from UN 'approved' action with their veto. Just as we would do to them if they ran into a similar situation.
 
Superfreak said:
to be clear... I don't give a fuck what the UN says. Russia will block us from UN 'approved' action with their veto. Just as we would do to them if they ran into a similar situation.
Click to expand...

Oh the irony ..

Obama wants to conduct an illegal war to punish a supposed illegal act.

Maybe its just me.
 
Darla said:
Didn't you say you supported intervention in Syria?
Click to expand...

I think we should absolutely try to prevent genocide when it occurs as it did in Rwanda, Sudan, Congo etc... if there is one group being targeted due to religious or ethnic reasons, then we should step in... especially if they lack the means to fight back.

Syria is currently in a civil war. While we don't like Assad, the other option is another Muslim brotherhood/Al Queda type leader from the opposition. We would like that even less. We should stay out of it. Especially since this has the makings for a full blown Sunni vs. Shia war with the big boys (Iran/Saudi/Turkey) behind the scenes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top