The Red Line: Part Deux

[hog88]

Ridiculous. I guess we shouldn't intevine with genocide. It isn't our problem. The Holocast wasn't our problem. Why care about 9/11? It wasn't my problem. Why catch a murderer stateside? It's not my blood, not my problem.

Do you think we got involved in WWII because of the Holocaust?

 

[PKT_VOL]

Following this logic, we should be bombing the hell out of NK.

I think the ethical case is there. I think the world ought to act.

Do you think we got involved in WWII because of the Holocaust?

Obviously, Pearl Harbor initiated our involvement, militarily. I guess you side with the others in this thread that think the world should have sat on its hands (unless directly attacked) with respect to the Holocaust (once it was known).

 

[MG1968]

I think the ethical case is there. I think the world ought to act.



Obviously, Pearl Harbor initiated our involvement, militarily. I guess you side with the others in this thread that think the world should have sat on its hands (unless directly attacked) with respect to the Holocaust (once it was known).

ever heard of the "Voyage of the Damned"?

 

[lawgator1]

If one read all the posts here and digested all the POV's, one could convince themselves that Assad had nothing to gain and the rebels had everything to gain. I am still not convinced that the rebels didn't do this. I don't trust intelligence (if you can call it that) that has been combed by Barry to prove a point of this magnitude. I would have to vote no until something proven by someone other than Barry was shown to me.

Why would Obama do that?

Bush had tons of incentive to go after Hussein and Iraq. The past, the threats, needing to take action against someone identifiable for 9/11. Obama has gained NOTHING by this. He's lost political capital. He has zero incentive to have manipulated anything about it.

Take your partisan blinders off. It might be the wrong decision -ok, I can agree with that. But it is utter nonsense to suggest that Obama is in any way promoting something untrue about it.

 

[Gannon Goodson]

Why would Obama do that?

Bush had tons of incentive to go after Hussein and Iraq. The past, the threats, needing to take action against someone identifiable for 9/11. Obama has gained NOTHING by this. He's lost political capital. He has zero incentive to have manipulated anything about it.

Take your partisan blinders off. It might be the wrong decision -ok, I can agree with that. But it is utter nonsense to suggest that Obama is in any way promoting something untrue about it.

Stop defending this moron. Obama and Bush are the same. Obama is just a slightly bigger government Rinocrat.

The only reason Obama wants to strike Syria is to save face after shooting off at the mouth. Any strike will accomplish nothing except waste a lot of taxpayer money.

 

[82_VOL_83]

Why would Obama do that?

Bush had tons of incentive to go after Hussein and Iraq. The past, the threats, needing to take action against someone identifiable for 9/11. Obama has gained NOTHING by this. He's lost political capital. He has zero incentive to have manipulated anything about it.

Take your partisan blinders off. It might be the wrong decision -ok, I can agree with that. But it is utter nonsense to suggest that Obama is in any way promoting something untrue about it.

Because he needs the support of Congress. To get the support of Congress, he needs intelligence reports that show Assad did this. It is NOT beyond Barry to bend the reports in his favor.

I would challenge you to take your blinders off and see just how corrupt and criminal this guy is.

 

[myrobbins7]

Im sure MSDNC and Faux News hasn't aired any of this because the Military–industrial complex must roll on, but thought I would share...

Syria Chemical Weapons Attack

 

[myrobbins7]

Stop defending this moron. Obama and Bush are the same. Obama is just a slightly bigger government Rinocrat.

The only reason Obama wants to strike Syria is to save face after shooting off at the mouth. Any strike will accomplish nothing except waste a lot of taxpayer money.

Not only that but I think there is another reason also (IMO).

IRAN.

Next stop for AL-CIADA, Iran.

 

[82_VOL_83]

Im sure MSDNC and Faux News hasn't aired any of this because the Military–industrial complex must roll on, but thought I would share...

Syria Chemical Weapons Attack

Not that this source would be biased or anything like that.....

 

[myrobbins7]

Not that this source would be biased or anything like that.....

Ok..nvm.

 

[Gannon Goodson]

Not only that but I think there is another reason also (IMO).

IRAN.

Next stop for AL-CIADA, Iran.

Rest assured, if Iraq didn't frighten Iran, then lobbing 20 missiles from destroyers in Mediterranean into a few empty government buildings in Syria isn't going to do the trick.

This "strike" is nothing more than an attempt to save face after the Community Organizer (aka fake tough guy) shot off at the mouth.

 

[Obsessed]

.

 

[VolsNSkinsFan]

Kerry just said the attacks would be "Unbelievably Small"

Yea Kerry. Kinda like your...

 

[myrobbins7]

Kerry just said the attacks would be "Unbelievably Small"

Yea Kerry. Kinda like your...

Yeah..watch the price tag, what a clown.

 

[utvolpj]

Not that this source would be biased or anything like that.....

I don't view the Germans as biased

“It is not Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya,” White House chief of staff Denis McDonough said Sunday during one of his five network television interviews. “This is a very concerned, concentrated, limited effort that we can carry out and that can underscore and secure our interests.”

But McDonough conceded the administration lacks “irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence” that skeptical Americans, including lawmakers who will start voting on military action this week, are seeking.

has more to do with a “common-sense test” rather than “irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence.”

Obama, top advisers work to persuade public and Congress to back action on Syria - The Washington Post

 

[utvolpj]

“Obama will tape interviews Monday afternoon with anchors from ABC, CBS and NBC, as well as with PBS, CNN and Fox News,” reports Politico. “The interviews will be conducted by ABC’s Diane Sawyer, CBS’s Scott Pelley, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, Fox’s Chris Wallace, NBC’s Brian Williams and PBS’s Gwen Ifill.”

banging that war drum

 

[Abe Hoffman]

War, what is it good for?

 

[Orangeslice13]

War, what is it good for?

The economy

 

[myrobbins7]

The economy

We dont need war for the economy when we have all those "shovel ready jobs".

 

[Abe Hoffman]

The economy

Wrong answer.

 

[davethevol]

The economy

Maybe it was during WW2, but is there any evidence to suggest that the last few wars have done anything to help our economy? Buying American flags to show support doesn't help as they are made in China.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

We dont need war for the economy when we have all those "shovel ready jobs".

:lolabove: shovel ready wasn't so shovel ready after all. Still wonder where all that stimulus (billions) money went? Have they fixed any bridges & roads yet anywhere maybe? I'm sure they have??

 

[Gramps]

War, what is it good for?

The economy

If that were the case our economy should be booming.

Maybe Bush and Obama didn't get the memo that war was good for the economy.

 

[Gramps]

Kerry just said the attacks would be "Unbelievably Small"

Yea Kerry. Kinda like your...

Unbelievably small ?
All that would do is pour gas on the fire.

What is their point of bombing?
I say take them out or walk away.
I vote for walking away.

This administration is a total flop.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Unbelievably small ?
All that would do is pour gas on the fire.

What is their point of bombing?
I say take them out or walk away.
I vote for walking away.

This administration is a total flop.

Wonder what would've happened if Jon Gruden was elected POTUS? Do you think his administration would be a total flop?