1991 Syria fought with us in the Gulf War, we usually consider those countries that fight along side us, allies. Syria was part of the Coalition forces.
For those who haven't yet...
- Thread starter Cancel 2016.2
- Start date
1991 Syria fought with us in the Gulf War, we usually consider those countries that fight along side us, allies. Syria was part of the Coalition forces.
Sierra
Verified User
The only thing keeping the Tuscon Raytheon plant alive is the Tomahawk Cruise missile. Wait....isn't John McCain from Arizona???? Wow....whowuddathunk?
There's at least a half dozen more credible reason for this Syria business than what you are being fed in the MSM.
And I'm sorry to say, 75% of liberals are buying it hook, line and sinker.
Cancel 2016.11
Darla
Sierra
Verified User
Because Dennis Kucinich doesn't have a chance. You certainly aren't suggesting we support someone from that ideological wasteland called the Republican party do you? This country is incredible impoverished when it comes to our political choices.
For now, we have to put up with Mr. Obama but that doesn't mean we approve of all his actions, or his fondness for his banking King Maker buddies. Totally off topic, but my brethren on the left should look up our new Commerce Secretary on wikipedia. Scroll down to where her family paid $500 million dollar fine for the shit they pulled in Chicago. They didn't like the federal laws so they needed a President they could work with. There was state senator Barry Obama. She did get her reward in the end, she's the Commerce Secretary. Rubin and Summers were the other King Makers of course. But I digress.
Annie
Not So Junior Member
Obama wasn't president in 2003, so he could be against it. Thus in the long run, looking smarter than Hillary, Biden, and Kerry. That was then, this is now.
While it certainly is fair for both sides to throw around the 'hypocrisy' card regarding Iraq and Syria, there are vast differences. Right or wrong Bush was 'all in' and built a case. Had Congressional approval, stated goals, said it would be long, and gathered a significant number of allies. With that all said, in the long run it wasn't successful. Some of us learned a thing or two.
This proposal of Obama's has been crazy from the get go, especially after the previous disasters of Iraq and Afghanistan, oh yeah, the last being primarily on him. 100k dead? We'll train some 'freedom fighters,' smuggle them some weapons, (out of Benghazi perhaps?).
Someone in Syria used chemical weapons, contrary to 'convinced' opinions, not sure which side. All are bad actors. The earlier 'red line' remark comes into play. Really thought that would be a good remark, look strong. Didn't work out that way. Considering the coming discussions on budget, ongoing questions regarding DOJ, IRS, NSA a bit too much like 'diversion.'
But, had to 'act quickly,' though Congress was gone. Didn't need Congress, UN was non-starter with Russian veto.
Whoops, not only the opposition partisans were against, so were his supporters. The independents were least supportive. Hmm, go to Congress decision made day after he asked Kerry to argue for the 'immediate force response. Kerry gives 'force speech' on Friday. Obama undercuts the argument on Saturday, then he and Joe play golf. Sends Kerry on all Sunday talk shows to say why we can wait. Why Congress doesn't need to be called back early.
Any wonder they lost the American people?
That's gonna leave a mark.
Another conspiracy theorist who thinks there is a secret organization trying to control the world.
Do you want to know why I know there is no such thing; because I have a brain.
If you think that this made Syria a friend and ally of the US; you just might be an extreme low information voter.
Nope, it is what we called them, then,, you need a name change, your detector is broken. If it was only for a short time, they are still called an ally and part of the colition forces.
I will take anyone from the Republican Party of the morons in the Democrat side of the aisle who think the Constitution is a living document and can be anything they say it should be.
Political representation is a necessary evil in a Democratic Republic; therefore, the efforts contained in our constitution to minimize their ability to cause damage are paramount. I will take a candidate that at least says they support the Constitution over one who thinks they need to re-invent it any day of the week.
I am amused that you think the Republican is an ideological wasteland while supporting a Liberal ideology that has a historic record failure and is an ideological wasteland.
On another note, I have great respect for Dennis Kucinich even if he is a whacked out lunatic leftist; he at least is honest and transparent about his views and has something very few Democrats have...ideological consistency. Unlike the haughty lying John Kerry; Vietnam War protestor and liar extraordinaire.
Thanks to low information voters who chose a transparent, lying, inept and inexperienced buffoon based on the pale color of his brown skin; was that you?
Did you vote for Obama? Did you re-elect Obama?
Another conspiracy theorist who thinks there is a secret organization trying to control the world.
Do you want to know why I know there is no such thing; because I have a brain.
You deny the existence of the Military Industrial Complex? Yes, you have quite the big brain there Mr Rove.
It's a positive thing that Americans seem to be willing to have the discussion now on it's future wars. But to have a discussion one must come armed with information that is from varied sources and not just from a pro-war source. Therefore the discussion will obviously remain superficial and never sway very far from the propagandists' line.
So should Americans go to sources that could be telling a totally different story on the reasons for war and the reasons against war? Yes, they must eventually but they are very well schooled to not even look at contrary propaganda. The propagandists have instilled in the American psyche the idea that all other sources of information is evil and shouldn't even be considered. Hence, hardly any Americans will go to Russia times.com or any other sources of news which would school them on contrary information to what their news propagandists and their government tells them.
And so they will remain uninformed and can usually be relied upon to support all wars to a degree that makes it possible for their country to continue their wars of aggression on phony and trumped up evidence.
So should Americans go to sources that could be telling a totally different story on the reasons for war and the reasons against war? Yes, they must eventually but they are very well schooled to not even look at contrary propaganda. The propagandists have instilled in the American psyche the idea that all other sources of information is evil and shouldn't even be considered. Hence, hardly any Americans will go to Russia times.com or any other sources of news which would school them on contrary information to what their news propagandists and their government tells them.
And so they will remain uninformed and can usually be relied upon to support all wars to a degree that makes it possible for their country to continue their wars of aggression on phony and trumped up evidence.
Has anyone ever told you it is incorrect form to ask a person who they voted for? If you can't figure out who all these partisans voted for, you hardly belong on this forum.
Aside from that the question is incredibly irrelevant.
Last edited:
Maher Arar doesn't think your distinctions as to Syria's status are all that meaningful.
1991...LOL, when did Kerry have a cozy dinner with Assad?
If you think you are winning any points by calling people like Rana, Sierra or myself low information voters, you are simply blowing your credibility to smithereens.
This statement makes zero sense. Obama was against Iraq; yet now he is for Syria. It isn’t very hard to look smart when you are surrounded by idiots like Hillary, Gore, Kerry, Reid and Pelosi.
It is sad when voters support a candidate not based on his ability, but merely because there is a “D” next to his name and he has brown skin.
How was Iraq less successful than Libya? I will wait.
Thank you for stating the obvious; not sure what this has to do with my comments.
Laurel and Hardy; but then those of us who saw through the emotional feel goodism of Obama’s rhetoric and his laughably inept versions of the Bush Presidency, we aren’t surprised by the mess domestically, or on the foreign policy front.
So did you vote for Obama the first time? Did you help to re-elect him?
If you think changing my screen name to "Truth Deflector" makes you look more credible or serious, you just might be an extreme low information voter.
But again, I haven't called out any person here as a low information voter because I certainly don't know if they voted for Obama or not. But I am certain given enough time, you will continually illustrate why you are a low information voter without a lot of help from me.
The blogosphere is filled with low information idiots who think there are such things as puppeteers and chem trails in the sky. The scary part is that some of them actually vote.
Now did you actually want to address the thread topic, or are you the typical troll who comes here to bait with childish insults and laughably stupid claims about dark masters controlling our brains?
By the way, how old are you?
Annie
Not So Junior Member
God that was stupid. LOL! No and no.