NO to military action in Syria. Good for them. Why risk the very good chance of
WW III to save face for Obama's political rhetoric "red line" comment before his election.
No doubt in my mind that Iran would love the excuse to hit Israel now
to get a first strike before their nuclear weapons are hit in the near future.
A strike on Syria would give them that perfect excuse.

No imminent danger to us and therefore Congress needs to vote on this.
A strike would be a no win solution, imho.

He really isn't very good at chess... Is he ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think Obama is looking for a crisis to divert attention to the fiscal cliff we are going to hit in October
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Russia's moving ships in. He got his wish
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

This will be Bush's fault !

Jesus, what ever happened to doing the right thing?

-spence

I think Obama is looking for a crisis to divert attention to the fiscal cliff we are going to hit in October
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
There is no fiscal cliff...Congress will vote to increase the debt limit, because they have to...

-spence

Jesus, what ever happened to doing the right thing?

-spence

I think we've tried that to death
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jesus, what ever happened to doing the right thing?

-spence

This isn't the right thing. Half of the people fighting the civil war are Muslim extremists. Their wet dream is to topple the government and set up a government under Shia law. They hate us as well. Let them fight for what they want which is a country that will be in a religious bubble and intolerant of anyone else's beliefs.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOYew1IA-Ag#t=21
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it's also a question of MONEY
fighting wars ain't cheap with little returns on the money invested
Americans are WAR weary....
the Mexican Cartels are making 40 billion a year ....so we need to end the DRUG war
at least on harmless weed , and then tax and regulate some money back into the US treasury

And where did you read this?
This isn't the right thing. Half of the people fighting the civil war are Muslim extremists. Their wet dream is to topple the government and set up a government under Shia law. They hate us as well. Let them fight for what they want which is a country that will be in a religious bubble and intolerant of anyone else's beliefs.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Is Iran tolerant of outsiders? Is the Taliban tolerant?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-03-19/world/37840878_1_al-nusra-deir-aleppo
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That article is focused on a small segment of the al Qaeda linked extremists.

I believe about 1/2 the rebels may consider themselves Islamist, but not all Islamists are necessarily extremist.http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-03-19/world/37840878_1_al-nusra-deir-aleppo
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You know I'm extremely tolerant of people's beliefs and lean pretty far to the left on some issues but not with this. Let them fight their war alone. Free all the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay and s end them over there to fight and when that country is full of every extremist nut job the world will be a better place.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think the problem is a lot get lumped into the extremist bin that might not really be.

Big issue in Syria is if the number of real extremists continues to rise. They're the ones getting all the weapons.
You know I'm extremely tolerant of people's beliefs and lean pretty far to the left on some issues but not with this. Let them fight their war alone. Free all the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay and s end them over there to fight and when that country is full of every extremist nut job the world will be a better place.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think the problem is a lot get lumped into the extremist bin that might not really be.

Big issue in Syria is if the number of real extremists continues to rise. They're the ones getting all the weapons.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I agree! Sending arms over there was beyond stupid and maybe even impeachable , when 4 Americans die over it .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Right. So why should we help them? This is failed logic beyond belief. Oh wait I know. Syria has OIL!!!! Duh.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

methinks we should steer clear of this one...talk about opening a can of worms.

With elections coming on the horizon, a good war is the best chance at keeping your party in power if you feel that your approval level is in the chitter
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I agree! Sending arms over there was beyond stupid and maybe even impeachable , when 4 Americans die over it .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yea, why didn't that story have legs?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I emailed my senators and congressmen. Don't know if it it will help or not. We need to stay out of this one. I like my Syrian bread, but its made in the US so i think we are safe on that front.

Right. So why should we help them? This is failed logic beyond belief. Oh wait I know. Syria has OIL!!!! Duh.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes, and if Obama allowed the domestic oil companies to begin drilling where they wanted 5 years ago, we would be 3/4 of the way to becoming totally independent.
They should have started fracking too.
If we send missiles now it will be over Obama's pride as much as it would be over oil.
So he should start, what could well be WW 111, over pride?

Yes, and if Obama allowed the domestic oil companies to begin drilling where they wanted 5 years ago, we would be 3/4 of the way to becoming totally independent.
They should have started fracking too.
If we send missiles now it will be over Obama's pride as much as it would be over oil.
So he should start, what could well be WW 111, over pride?

You think we don't frack already???

Yea, why didn't that story have legs?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The same reason the Trevon Martin incident did have legs .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You think we don't frack already???

Not to the degree we could. Not that it alone would make us 100% independent.
My point was pretty clear, we are now 5 years behind in drilling that would have gotten us much closer to energy independence.


Obama wants to have our military get him out of the corner he painted himself into.
So what is the strategy , and what is the anticipated result? What is the end result?
The UN isn't even finished their inspection and he is talking military action. He is willing to go it alone without the British. How many of the 20 countries that backed us going after wmd in Iraq are going to back us now?
Even Carter has stated unless we are in imminent danger the president must get the approval of Congress. Joe Biden is on record saying that he would personally lead the impeachment of a President who, before making military strikes, didn't get Congressional approval.
Is military action way too much, or way too soon? What ever happened to the infamous do all be all, leftist negotiating table? I guess ya just can't negotiate from weakness.

This will be Bush's fault !

I know you like to constantly post that, but do you see anyone actually blaming Pres. Bush for the all times you post it?

The house of commons is working under the theory of "fool me once, F you, fool me twice, F me". Prob. waiting to see more evidence.

Nothing good can possibly come of this no matter what we do... Best to preserve the lives of Americans we don't need a conflict with Russia.

The same reason the Trevon Martin incident did have legs .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Oh yes, the all powerful media. Amazing how they managed to snuff all that Internet evidence on right wing websites. Must have the NSA on their payroll.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You think we don't frack already???

A lot of tracking going on, a lot of drilling for oil as well. Some people just don't have a taste for observation...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The irony of it all, a Nobel Peace Prize winner starts a war that could
very well end all wars because there will be no one left to fight.

With a late poll showing 80% of those polled are against an attack,
if he were smart he'd call in a session of Congress and have it voted on.
But as the old saying goes, "Pride goeth before the fall."

A lot of tracking going on, a lot of drilling for oil as well. Some people just don't have a taste for observation...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

he said "fracking" not "tracking"...makes the rest of your statement pretty funny doesn't it? :biglaugh:

The irony of it all, a Nobel Peace Prize winner starts a war that could


or that this is a President who has either continued or taken to a whole new level nearly everything that he vilified and demonized his predecessor for doing during the course of his campaign for the office, this would simply be par for the course in terms or irony and hypocrisy with this guy :uhuh: don't know why we'd expect anything less(or more) at this point

Fock syria, fock Allah,..... We would be supporting terrorists. Spend our war budget on our vets and seniors!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

My hunch is that Obama has no intentions of bombing Syria. Congres will say "no" and he gets off the "red line" hook.
Games... All games.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

My hunch is that Obama has no intentions of bombing Syria. Congres will say "no" and he gets off the "red line" hook.
Games... All games.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

BINGO! His only political choice.

Best quote of the day, "Amature Hour". ( Krauthammer)

BINGO! His only political choice.

Best quote of the day, "Amature Hour". ( Krauthammer)
Great stuff, calls amature hour then says he would have done basically the same thing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Great stuff, calls amature hour then says he would have done basically the same thing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Spence basically ???????
You neglected to say he said he wouldn't unless there was a
strategy and an end game plan.
LOL, Spence you becoming a Hawk ? :)

Great stuff, calls amature hour then says he would have done basically the same thing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

he most certainly does not, he points out the many missteps and the ways in which he's painted himself into a corner resulting in "amature hour", he's very clear that he would NOT would have done "basically the same thing" and your statement bears no resemblance to the truth...nice try though:uhuh: not a hawk...a zombie :shocked:

Once we elected Obama, I thought his presence would be a rallying point for the reast of the world to get behind us, whereas Bush was a cowboy who didn't try to get international support. How is that working out? Are our allies indicating that they are willing to pitch in?

Obama can't get one right even by accident. How does it make us look, when Obama talks tough, then punts it to Congress, then goes golfing?

Once we elected Obama, I thought his presence would be a rallying point for the reast of the world to get behind us, whereas Bush was a cowboy who didn't try to get international support. How is that working out? Are our allies indicating that they are willing to pitch in?

Obama can't get one right even by accident. How does it make us look, when Obama talks tough, then punts it to Congress, then goes golfing?

It's all about making republicans look bad. Now he can say, the GOP doesn't care about Syrians being gassed . It's getting down right embarrassing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's getting down right embarrassing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It certainly is.

It's all about making republicans look bad. Now he can say, the GOP doesn't care about Syrians being gassed . It's getting down right embarrassing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Actually the GOP is this fool's biggest backer right now.

Think about this:We have a president in so far above his head with this "red-line" sh!t that he's actually allying himself with McCain and Beohner to save any credibility he has left.All the while we have Pelosi calling it "humanities line" and an entire Congress unsure of itself and the decisions it can make all because of political ambition.

Wake up ladies.......this guy could put us in a place we all don't need to be so that he doesn't look like a pussy.

Agreed basswipe. This is bad. I bet Kerry wants to run for president next and this is his chance to take the stage for some chest thumping.
Meanwhile, radioactive water is flooding I to the pacific from Fukushima. Why don't we focus on that?? That seems more important to me. The people of Syria can fight their own battle. Perpetual war does not mean perpetual peace.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Agreed basswipe. This is bad. I bet Kerry wants to run for president next and this is his chance to take the stage for some chest thumping.
Meanwhile, radioactive water is flooding I to the pacific from Fukushima. Why don't we focus on that?? That seems more important to me. The people of Syria can fight their own battle. Perpetual war does not mean perpetual peace.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And this radioactive will stay around as long as the middle east has been fighting each other. Thousands of years! Go green! Clean up the plastic in the Pacific.
Let them kill each other, why is it our problem again?

we should be exporting something to make them as passive as O and O.

Actually the GOP is this fool's biggest backer right now.

Think about this:We have a president in so far above his head with this "red-line" sh!t that he's actually allying himself with McCain and Beohner to save any credibility he has left.All the while we have Pelosi calling it "humanities line" and an entire Congress unsure of itself and the decisions it can make all because of political ambition.

Wake up ladies.......this guy could put us in a place we all don't need to be so that he doesn't look like a pussy.

I don't consider Beohner or McCain mainstream GOP by any stretch. I don't think the resolution will pass . After yesterday's hearings...holy sheet, is our leadership a mess
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[QUOTE=justplugit;1012055]Hope your right Buck, but politicians make strange bed fellows.
I admire Mc Cain for his bravery and military service and tough stances,
one of the main reasons I voted for him, and he certainly wouldn't have made a worldwide tour putting America down and whispering in Putin's ear.
That being said I don't see him as a military strategist and don't agree with
his wanting to use force in this instance.
If O was so concerned about his red line , he should have started immediately buildinga contingency plan, a coalition and a strategy in place including an end plan.
As usual, a day late and a dollar short, what else is new?

Hope your right Buck, but politicians make strange bed fellows.
I admire Mc Cain for his bravery and military service and tough stances.
One of the main reasons I voted for him, and he certainly wouldn't have made a worldwide tour putting America down and whispering in Putin's ear.
That being said I don't see him as a military strategist and don't agree with
his wanting to use force in this instance.
If O was so concerned about his red line , he should have started immediately building
a contingency plan, build a coalition and a strategy in place including an end plan.
As usual, a day late and a dollar short.

He made and address on the worlds stage and basically said the world, not he, drew the red line and then proceeded to say that there really wasn't an emanate threat to the US. Thereby admitting he had to ask for a congressional resolution . What a tool bag !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If O was so concerned about his red line , he should have started immediately buildinga contingency plan, a coalition and a strategy in place including an end plan.
As usual, a day late and a dollar short, what else is new?
Building a coalition implies you're going to take action. Unless you plan to invade preemptive a public facing coalition does nothing.

The tough talk is because you assume they're not going to think they can get away with it.

Not attacking right away and working to build consensus takes a lot more resolve than simply pushing the button.

-spence

Building a coalition implies you're going to take action. Unless you plan to invade preemptive a public facing coalition does nothing.

The tough talk is because you assume they're not going to think they can get away with it.

Not attacking right away and working to build consensus takes a lot more resolve than simply pushing the button.

-spence

He is not going to build any consensus! Keep dreaming.
Every time he opens mouth we lose more credibility . He's no George Bush that's for sure
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He's no George Bush that's for sure
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What a relief.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

on George bushes Last speech he just couldn't wait to say PHEW!
because he knew it was his last...he was after all :point: BURNT OUT

Barry has already reached that phase of his presidency

Did I hear that right???? Markey voted "present "
That's hilarious
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Building a coalition implies you're going to take action. Unless you plan to invade preemptive a public facing coalition does nothing.



Not attacking right away and working to build consensus takes a lot more resolve than simply pushing the button.

-spence

Isn't throwing down a red line mean you plan to take action "IF". A true leader, after making a red line statement, would have started to find the countries who would back him and how far they were willing to go.

Your second quote is just exactly what O didn't do. It was an immediate reaction
to use missiles launched from our ships, targets announced and a statement that he was willing to go it alone. Now he announces that it wasn't his red line but the world's red line. I must not of had my hearing aide on ?????

I'm thinking if we are going to send a message , lets jut bomb Iran's nuclear facilities and get it over with. That red lines going to be crossed soon.
Message sent to Syria, Iran and that nutty Nprth Korean.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't consider Beohner or McCain mainstream GOP by any stretch. I don't think the resolution will pass . After yesterday's hearings...holy sheet, is our leadership a mess
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You truly believe Paul and Cruz are the mainstream then?

I'm very torn on this issue.
On one hand, we should stay the F out of the middle east. on the other, they used chemical weapons, and that's a line that can't be crossed without repercussions... I really can't decide where I stand on this one...

You truly believe Paul and Cruz are the mainstream then?

I'm very torn on this issue.
On one hand, we should stay the F out of the middle east. on the other, they used chemical weapons, and that's a line that can't be crossed without repercussions... I really can't decide where I stand on this one...

They used them before this time and Iraq did too. Hate to see world war 3 started over this . Then what? He lines up 1k people and machine guns them. So we only go in because of the means by which they were killed?
And yes , I do believe the latter two do have more in common with conservative believes .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

whatever happened to sitting down with these dictators over tea, without any pre-conditions and fixing these problems without having to resort to military action?

wasn't long ago that Pelosi, O, Kerry, Clinton and others were telling us that Assad was brilliant, highly educated, a reformer who would fundamentally change his country, Hope & Change for Syria or something....guess we never learn

best quote of the weekend by one of the befuddled sycophant media types on one of the big three propaganda outlets ...."after making his statement in the Rose Garden, the President played a round of golf"

yup.....

Nero Fiddled
Zero Golfs
:uhuh:

Building a coalition implies you're going to take action. Unless you plan to invade preemptive a public facing coalition does nothing.

The tough talk is because you assume they're not going to think they can get away with it.

Not attacking right away and working to build consensus takes a lot more resolve than simply pushing the button.

-spence

"Building a coalition implies you're going to take action. Unless you plan to invade preemptive a public facing coalition does nothing."

Absolutely, totally, one hundred percent bullsh*t.

Consider NATO, which was a coalition formed to keep the Soviet Union from getting any ideas about invading member nations. The existence of NATO did not involve any pre-emptive military action against anyone, it was purely preventative. And it worked.

A coalition can be a very effective deterrent. Unfortunately, it requires that the leaders of the nations in the coalition, are taken seriously by their adversaries, and that's clearly not the case with our Dear Leader Obama.

We're talking about localized action here, not a long-term defence strategy...very different things.

-spence

I really can't decide where I stand on this one...

I agree 100%.

On the one hand, this guy has killed tens of thousands of civilians with bullets. But we are only willing to attack when 1,000 more are killed with gas, and that's that much worse than killing a larger number of children with guns?

On the other hand, I do believe that the strong have the responsibility to protect the weak, and if no one else can save these kids, is it not worth doing? But then again, if we kill/remove Assad, there's no way of knowing that whoever replaces him, won't do the same thing to his political opponents?

It's a mess. That part of the world is a godawful mess. Very difficult to know what the right thing to do is. But when I was in the Marines, all I ever prayed for, was a worthwhile mission. Trying to save inncocent civilians is about as noble as it gets. But peace, at least lasting peace, doesn't seem to work in that part of the world.

I had a colonel who used to say, "as long as those people hate each other more than they love their own children, there can be no possible peace." I guess that just about sums it up.

We're talking about localized action here, not a long-term defence strategy...very different things.

-spence

So why can an international coalition work as a defensive deterrent against the Soviet Union, but not against pip-squeak Syria?

Enlighten me.

It's common sense Spence. Most people (not all, but most) can be controlled with a sufficient threat of force.

So why can an international coalition work as a defensive deterrent against the Soviet Union, but not against pip-squeak Syria?

Enlighten me.

It's common sense Spence. Most people (not all, but most) can be controlled with a sufficient threat of force.
Very different situations. One if focused on a long-term defensive position with a very clear mandate.

The other is reactive in nature, responding to an isolated and incremental event that has a less clear mandate.

Can't just rubber stamp on onto the other...very different.

-spence

We're talking about localized action here, not a long-term defence strategy...very different things.

-spence

Spence, seriously you think this will be a localized action???
No one can predict what the outcome will be. We are not talking Grenada here
but a match that could set off the start of WW 111.
There are no simple solutions to this problem. Either side ,in this on going war,
could spread these chemical weapons, and neither side can be trusted.
Throwing a few missiles will not destroy all their chemical weapons and it
will end up being our troops on the ground to find and destroy them.
Once started this will neither be localized or short term.

Spence, seriously you think this will be a localized action???
No one can predict what the outcome will be. We are not talking Grenada here
but a match that could set off the start of WW 111.
There are no simple solutions to this problem. Either side ,in this on going war, could spread these chemical weapons, and neither side can be trusted. Throwing a few missiles will not destroy all their chemical weapons and it will end up being our troops on the ground to find and destroy them. Once started this will neither be localized or short term.
The WW3 talk is just fear mongering. None of the major players would benefit from it and hence it's not likely.

The point here wasn't to destroy all the chemical weapons, it was to send a message that the international community doesn't allow the use of them. At this point what's the cost of doing nothing?

-spence

At this point what's the cost of doing nothing?

-spence

Spoken like a true disciple of Obama, who via his penchant for voting "present", is a great believer in doing nothing.

Spence, the potential cost of doing nothing, is enormous. I cannot believe you don't already know this, but the cost of doing nohting, is that it sends a message to Assad and others like him, that the US is too impotent to prevent this kind of thing in the future.

The cost of doing nothing is that it invites subsequent war crimes.

How can you really ask that? Are you that naive? Or do you literally have zero empathy for anyone who wasn't as lucky as you and I, to be born in a place that values freedom?

Spoken like a true disciple of Obama, who via his penchant for voting "present", is a great believer in doing nothing.

Spence, the potential cost of doing nothing, is enormous. I cannot believe you don't already know this, but the cost of doing nohting, is that it sends a message to Assad and others like him, that the US is too impotent to prevent this kind of thing in the future.

The cost of doing nothing is that it invites subsequent war crimes.

How can you really ask that? Are you that naive? Or do you literally have zero empathy for anyone who wasn't as lucky as you and I, to be born in a place that values freedom?

Jim, I believe you are actually agreeing with Spence on this. Spence backs doing something, sending the message that the "international community," whatever that is, does not allow the use of really nasty weapons. Good old fashioned guns, and such, (the very weapons that regular folks should not possess and would be banned by the "international community") are OK.

The WW3 talk is just fear mongering. None of the major players would benefit from it and hence it's not likely.

It doesn't appear that neither of the previous World Wars benefited anyone, but they happened anyway because of, among other things, escalating local and national disputes. Wasn't one of the reasons not to respond "irrationally" to various radical Islamic provocations exactly to avoid inflaming what the radicals wanted--a major worldwide jihad against the West and the infidels?

The point here wasn't to destroy all the chemical weapons, it was to send a message that the international community doesn't allow the use of them. At this point what's the cost of doing nothing?
-spence

Apparently, the "international community" is divided on many, many issues. Various nations within that "community" have stockpiles of such weapons. Not sure of why this international community would produce and stock stuff that it doesn't allow the use of.

And this "community" seems often to be paralyzed against "doing" something because, it seems, it usually contradicts itself. It really appears to be a house divided against itself, a rather rickety, crumbling house. Within such a "community" the cost of doing nothing, in the end, is not much different than doing "something."

The difference, when the dust settles, temporarily, is who gets what. Who is getting what in the dispute between tyrants and jihadists might make a difference to the U.S., but the tyrants may be more to our benefit than the others. And if it were really for the liberation of individuals from the oppression of a dictatorial State, and from the tyranny of an intolerant religion, it might be beneficial for us to actually fight for that liberation rather than merely send a message. Even unilaterally. But the Arab Spring, so far, doesn't indicate such liberation.

LOL.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The WW3 talk is just fear mongering. None of the major players would benefit from it and hence it's not likely.

The point here wasn't to destroy all the chemical weapons, it was to send a message that the international community doesn't allow the use of them. At this point what's the cost of doing nothing?

-spence

Fear mongering and not likely?????
If you really think that, you have your head in the sand.
Iran would use any excuse for attacking Israel preemptively before Israel could
destroy their growing nuclear program. You don't think Israel would hesitate to
use nuclear weapons if attacked with chemical weapons? Once nuclear weapons are in play, it's any body's guess. Your not dealing with rational people here but with a myriad of countries with different agendas.
As stated before, NO ONE knows what the outcome of either attacking or not attacking would lead to. O got us into this mess with his pre election rhetoric.

BTW, please explain what O's red line is when it comes to Iran getting nuclear weapons in the very near future and what will he do. Hope he has built up a coalition and has a plan. Not likely.
Spence, this is not like Clinton sending a missile into an abandoned aspirin factory.

Iran would use any excuse for attacking Israel preemptively before Israel could destroy their growing nuclear program.
I think there's zero chance Iran makes a pre-emptive strike on Israel. They are fully aware Tehran would be vaporized in an hour. Iran has no where to hide.

Your not dealing with rational people here but with a myriad of countries with different agendas.
And for all of them the number one agenda item is staying in power.

This is pretty much the Syria story as well. Assad recognized he need to start showing some reforms as the Arab Spring heated up and had a new administration willing to talk...but the resistance was more than he gambled on and escalated quickly into a full on civil war.

As stated before, NO ONE knows what the outcome of either attacking or not attacking would lead to. O got us into this mess with his pre election rhetoric.
That's nonsense, it would be a messy situation no matter what.

BTW, please explain what O's red line is when it comes to Iran getting nuclear weapons in the very near future and what will he do. Hope he has built up a coalition and has a plan. Not likely.
Spence, this is not like Clinton sending a missile into an abandoned aspirin factory.

Iran will get a nuke regardless of any red line...even Israel can't stop them now...the bigger question is if that's a show stopper. Remember, that regime doesn't want to lose power as well.

-spence

I think there's zero chance Iran makes a pre-emptive strike on Israel. They are fully aware Tehran would be vaporized in an hour. Iran has no where to hide.


for all of them the number one agenda item is staying in power.

This is pretty much the Syria story as well. Assad recognized he need to start showing some reforms as the Arab Spring heated up and had a new administration willing to talk...but the resistance was more than he gambled on and escalated quickly into a full on civil war.


That's nonsense, it would be a messy situation no matter what.


Iran will get a nuke regardless of any red line...even Israel can't stop them now...the bigger question is if that's a show stopper. Remember, that regime doesn't want to lose power as well.

-spence

"I think there's zero chance Iran makes a pre-emptive strike on Israel. They are fully aware Tehran would be vaporized in an hour. Iran has no where to hide"

Spence, think for a minute. Many of these people (perhaps the leaders of Iran, perhaps not) are so committed to their cause, that they don't fear consequences, that's how you get so many suicide bombers. You can't necessarily apply logic to these people. The kooky president of Iran has said he would gladly be a martyr to wipe Israel off the map. Whether or not he means it, who knows?

"for all of them the number one agenda item is staying in power."

Not for all of them. For some, the really scary ones, the number one item is serving Allah, even if, or especially if, they have to die in the process.

"Iran will get a nuke regardless of any red line...even Israel can't stop them now"

Sure they can. Israel has nukes today. Iran doesn't.

My bet is that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon, and it won't be Obama that stops them, it will be Israel. The Israelis will never allow Iran to get a nuke, they will do whatever it takes to stop that, and they will be justified to do it. That's my prediction.

Spence, Jim did a nice job answering you point for point. Nothing further to say.

You and I are both speculating here as to the results of O's plan of a "shot across the bow" working,without need for further action or escalation of problems in the region. If that is your thinking, and it works, my hat will be off to you.
My problem has been, since day one, that there was no strategy or end game plan
and shooting from the hip, instead of looking at all your options , usually
doesn't turn out well. No crystal ball here, just looking at present and past history in that region.

Only time will tell.

Backing the uprising in Iran sure looks like it might have been a good move .
Since this is all about credibility, won't that all change with a new President? I thought that's what happened when Bush left?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The number one tool that governments use to strengthen their power hold on their country is fear. All this stuff is is fear mongering to get the people of this world to give in.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Reuters- Russia sending a missile cruiser into the Mediteranian
to be joined by a destroyer and frigate.
No problem here, they say they don't want to get involved in a conflict in Syria.
We should feel much better now. Just a scare tactic, nothing could escalate.

Fearmongering
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

LOL.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ROFLMAO is more like it.

I've never been more afraid of things to come.Obama and his supporters (sorry buckman this includes the mainstream GOP) are about to do something really stupid for which America and the west in general really don't need to be involved in.

Both sides have complete and total hatred of America,hell they can't even decide if they like themselves as inter-tribal warfare has been going on for a thousand+ years over who's the successor to muhammad.

As harsh as it may sound...LET THESE PEOPLE KILL ONE ANOTHER,its a win-win situation for the world.

ROFLMAO is more like it.

I've never been more afraid of things to come.Obama and his supporters (sorry buckman this includes the mainstream GOP) are about to do something really stupid for which America and the west in general really don't need to be involved in.

Both sides have complete and total hatred of America,hell they can't even decide if they like themselves as inter-tribal warfare has been going on for a thousand+ years over who's the successor to muhammad.

As harsh as it may sound...LET THESE PEOPLE KILL ONE ANOTHER,its a win-win situation for the world.

I agree. As Sarah Palin said "let Allah sort it out"
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I've never been more afraid of things to come.

No need for us to be afraid of things to come, the new buzz word for those
favoring a strike is "fear mongering". Like a few words will do away with all the
unknowns of getting involved in a tinderbox of crazies.

I wonder what the O sheepels would be saying if this mess was caused by a Bush
red line ????
LOL

As unAmercan as this sounds, at this point I trust Russian intelligence more then our own . They believe the rebels released the gas.
Let's not forget , The Boston bombing wouldn't have happened if the Russians were in charge .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As unAmercan as this sounds, at this point I trust Russian intelligence more then our own . They believe the rebels released the gas.
Let's not forget , The Boston bombing wouldn't have happened if the Russians were in charge .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As unamerican as this sounds, I'd rather have a beer with Putin than Obama. (Although I'd leave my Super Bowl ring at home if i had one). Putin has more street smarts than Obama and seems to have a plan for everything he does. Putin could out smart Obama one on one. The dude has Moxie.......even though he is a commie bastard.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As unAmercan as this sounds, at this point I trust Russian intelligence more then our own . They believe the rebels released the gas.
Let's not forget , The Boston bombing wouldn't have happened if the Russians were in charge .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The same way we flew planes into the World Trade Center?
Weren't the Tsarnaev's from Russia?

The same way we flew planes into the World Trade Center?
Weren't the Tsarnaev's from Russia?

Let's not get stupid here :)
The Russians warned us not once but twice about the Tsarnauv's
That's a known fact .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Oh I don't know Buck, look how fast and accurate the WH came up with the
intelligence report on how "the tape" was the reason for the uprising in Libiya
and the deaths of 4 Americans in Benghazi.

Oh I don't know Buck, look how fast and accurate the WH came up with the
intelligence report on how "the tape" was the reason for the uprising in Libiya
and the deaths of 4 Americans in Benghazi.

Not true ! They said it was terrorism from day one . LMAO
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Let's not get stupid here :)
The Russians warned us not once but twice about the Tsarnauv's
That's a known fact .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It is also well known the Chechens got the Russians with their pants down.
definition of oxymoron;
military intelligence....

Call me naive,but I will be very surprised if the rebels gassed themselves to get our help. It is this type of conspiracy theory that I put in the WTC category.

Spence, think for a minute. Many of these people (perhaps the leaders of Iran, perhaps not) are so committed to their cause, that they don't fear consequences, that's how you get so many suicide bombers. You can't necessarily apply logic to these people. The kooky president of Iran has said he would gladly be a martyr to wipe Israel off the map. Whether or not he means it, who knows?
Seriously, how many Iranian suicide bombers have you seen lately?

Not for all of them. For some, the really scary ones, the number one item is serving Allah, even if, or especially if, they have to die in the process.
How many people in Iranian leadership positions have given themselves to "the cause"? Seriously, you don't think these guys enjoy their drivers, chefs and tailored suits just like the rest of us? :devil2:

See point above.

Sure they can. Israel has nukes today. Iran doesn't.
There is zero chance Israel will launch a nuke attack to stop Iran from getting one. If they thought they could take it out in one strike conventionally perhaps, but the program is so well dispersed it's impossible.

My bet is that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon, and it won't be Obama that stops them, it will be Israel. The Saudis will never allow Iran to get a nuke, they will do whatever it takes to stop that, and they will be justified to do it. That's my prediction.

Fixed.

-spence

It is also well known the Chechens got the Russians with their pants down.
definition of oxymoron;
military intelligence....

Call me naive,but I will be very surprised if the rebels gassed themselves to get our help. It is this type of conspiracy theory that I put in the WTC category.

One is plausible and maybe even likely
How many do we kill with missles to teach him not to kill with gas ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

many of these "Syrian Rebels" are in fact Al Qaeda and fighters from out of country, it's not at all implausible that they set up a small gassing of Syrian citizens to provoke a strike, try to remember who we're dealing with....they were also very aware of O's "red line"...the fact is it's still unclear who is responsible...

it would help if the administration had any credibility on anything.....O, Kerry, Clinton, Pelosi, and on might have "great resumes" but there is very little of substance on those resumes when you look closely, these people are peacocks who are fantastic at preening their feathers and will squawk loudly when disturbed but they are little more than high maintenance lawn ornaments...:uhuh:

many of these "Syrian Rebels" are in fact Al Qaeda and fighters from out of country, it's not at all implausible that they set up a small gassing of Syrian citizens to provoke a strike, try to remember who we're dealing with....they were also very aware of O's "red line"...the fact is it's still unclear who is responsible...
It's also possible that this entire civil war is a Miley Cyrus PR stunt.

Hey, nobody has dis-proven it.

-spence

It's also possible that this entire civil war is a Miley Cyrus PR stunt.

Hey, nobody has dis-proven it.

-spence

You're still believing in hope and change .. Please
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it would help if the administration had any credibility on anything.....

And therein lies a big part of the problem.
Just a few:
"You have to pass Obamacare to see what's in it."
"Wait till after the election Mr Putin."
"Libya attacks were caused by the tape."
"We are going to find out what happened and punish those who were involved in Benghazi."
"We are going to get at the bottom of the IRS debacle."
"We are going to change Washington and have the most transparent administration ever."

So what are we suppose to believe?

I do have to give credit where credit is due. The President does appear to have united republicans and democrats across this nation . Just about everyone is against starting another war
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's also possible that this entire civil war is a Miley Cyrus PR stunt.

Hey, nobody has dis-proven it.

-spence

you preen and condescend a lot for someone that is so frequently wrong....:uhuh: but hey, you can always disappear and then pop up on another thread, causing unnecessary irriration :biglaugh:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/357799/if-it-wasnt-syria-it-would-have-been-something-else-victor-davis-hanson


VDH brilliantly assesses the disaster-in-chief

you preen and condescend a lot for someone that is so frequently wrong....:uhuh: but hey, you can always disappear and then pop up on another thread, causing unnecessary irriration :biglaugh:

Funny, you often say that but never really offer any anecdotes. Like all your cut and paste posts, all talk...no thinking.

Even this last, Jesus, I wonder if these guys just have a list of made up talking points to disparage the President and look for situations to use them.

The criticism of our White House is looking a bit like a bad Mad Libs.

-spence

Funny, you often say that but never really offer any anecdotes. Like all your cut and paste posts, all talk...no thinking.

Even this last, Jesus, I wonder if these guys just have a list of made up talking points to disparage the President and look for situations to use them.

The criticism of our White House is looking a bit like a bad Mad Libs.

-spence

blah...blah...blahhh...get some new material :uhuh:

The horrible irony here is that many people who hate obama and always support Bush's policies are against this Syria conflict at all costs and site reasoning that debunks their defense of bush going into Iraq.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The horrible irony here is that many people who hate obama and always support Bush's policies are against this Syria conflict at all costs and site reasoning that debunks their defense of bush going into Iraq.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The fabricated hatred for Obama has far surpassed what the Left feigned for Bush.

I fear that the majority of opposition is rooted in partisan circlejerkery rather than pragmatism and the sheep are just chortling along with their eyes closed.

-spence

many people who hate obama and always support Bush's policies .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

name one :)

.

rooted in partisan circlejerkery rather than pragmatism and the sheep are just chortling along with their eyes closed.

-spence

I think you just described yourself quite well :uhuh:

I think you just described yourself quite well :uhuh:

You forgot the chortle.

-spence

You forgot the chortle.

-spence

..zzzzzzzzzzzzzz'...same song ...different day..."hate"...blah blah..."partisan"....blah blah..."circlejerk"....blah blah..."not thinking"...blah blah

It's also possible that this entire civil war is a Miley Cyrus PR stunt.

Hey, nobody has dis-proven it.

-spence

the "rebels"

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ML_SYRIA?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-09-08-05-37-13

AMMAN, Jordan (AP) -- Rebels including al-Qaida-linked fighters gained control of a Christian village northeast of the capital Damascus.

The rebel advance into the area this week was spearheaded by Jabhat al-Nusra, or the Nusra Front, exacerbating fears among Syrians and religious minorities about the role played by Islamic extremists within the rebel ranks.

A Maaloula resident said the rebels, many of them sporting beards and shouting God is great, attacked Christian homes and churches shortly after moving into the village overnight.

"They shot and killed people. I heard gunshots and then I saw three bodies lying in the middle of a street in the old quarters of the village," said the resident, reached by telephone from neighboring Jordan. "So many people fled the village for safety."

Now, Maaloula "is a ghost town. Where is President Obama to see what befallen on us?" asked the man.

He said one of the churches, called Demyanos, had been torched and that gunmen stormed into two other churches and robbed them.

Most of the gunmen are foreigners, he said, adding that he heard different dialects, mainly of Tunisians, Libyans, Moroccans and Chechens.

Another resident, a Christian man, said he saw militants forcing some Christian residents to convert to Islam. "I saw the militants grabbing five villagers Wednesday and threatening them (saying): `Either you convert to Islam, or you will be beheaded,'" he said.

A Christian woman who spoke to the AP on Thursday also said there were reports that militants threatened villagers with death if they did not convert.



Obama will intensify his efforts to sell a skeptical Congress and a war-weary American public on a military strike against Syria.:uhuh:

Interesting your use of quotes in an attempt to mislead.

-spence

In all honesty Spence, if Bush was President now, and wanted to go into Syria for the same reasons as O, what would you be saying?

In all honesty Spence, if Bush was President now, and wanted to go into Syria for the same reasons as O, what would you be saying?

he's gonna really struggle with those first four words :)

like this...

When asked this morning if the U.S. has any pledges of military support for strikes in Syria, White House chief of staff Denis McDonough emphasized that the G20 and other nations have made supportive condemnations of the Syrian government’s actions, but when repeatedly pressed by CNN’s Candy Crowley, he provided no examples of countries that have endorsed or will provide personnel or equipment for a military intervention.

He wouldn’t explicitly admit that the U.S. has no allies willing to provide support, saying, “You’re trying to get me to say that, but I’m not going to say it.” There is specific support from the EU and others, he said, for “holding Syria accountable.”


say it....SAY IT!......nope

"sophistry"....like the use of those quotes Spence?


http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-contradictions-obama-syria-20130908,0,4466835.story

"As administration officials lay out their case in favor of a punitive attack on Syria, they have been making all of these seemingly contradictory contentions, confusing supporters and providing rhetorical weapons to their opponents.""


"The sometimes-tortured quality of the argument was apparent over the weekend as some officials claimed that the strikes would shift the momentum of the Syrian war, and others said it would largely be unchanged."

read the article. The administration peacocks are far more interested in preserving and maintaining their "appearance" than they are about doing anything meaningful...and everyone knows it:)

OK....here's how we get rid of Assad...we get the guy who is sitting in jail for making the movie that caused the Bengazi tragedy to make another disparaging movie showing Assad cursing Allah, burning the Koran and drawing silly cartoons of the prophet mohammed....this will inflame the arab street......Assad will have to flee the middle east and seek assylum with his dear friend John Kerry, he can live out his years in one of Kerry's mansions as an undocumented dictator where they can dine together and discuss reform and Pelosi can visit whenever she wants without having to leave the country against the warnings of every living former secretary of state, maybe he can become a professor at Harvard or Columbia and enjoy the benefits of social security, the SNAP program and, Obamacare(in other words, the American Dream)..........

Best idea I've seen yet. :hihi:
Gotta luv the definition of the American Dream. :D

Seriously, how many Iranian suicide bombers have you seen lately?


How many people in Iranian leadership positions have given themselves to "the cause"? Seriously, you don't think these guys enjoy their drivers, chefs and tailored suits just like the rest of us? :devil2:

See point above.


There is zero chance Israel will launch a nuke attack to stop Iran from getting one. If they thought they could take it out in one strike conventionally perhaps, but the program is so well dispersed it's impossible.



Fixed.

-spence

"There is zero chance Israel will launch a nuke attack to stop Iran from getting one"

I disagree. If Iran gets a nuke, there's every reason to believe Iran would use it against Israel. Therefore, there's no valid reason for Israel to leave anything off the table to prevent it.

We'll see on that score, time will tell.

Chalk it up to another blown opportunity for Obama/Clinton when they chose to do nothing during the Iranian uprising some time ago...

The fabricated hatred for Obama has far surpassed what the Left feigned for Bush.

I fear that the majority of opposition is rooted in partisan circlejerkery rather than pragmatism and the sheep are just chortling along with their eyes closed.

-spence

You forgot racism as a reason and an explanation for all the democrats that are opposed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device