Is this what obama wants Americans to support?

[bigrebnc1775]

Syria has chemical weapons.

So did Iraq.

 

[Moonglow]

Syria has chemical weapons.

So does the US and many other nations.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I'm fed up with playing the UN police game.

 

[Dissent]

I don't care if Syria or anyone else has nukes,chemical weapons anything...that's their thing not mine and I don't think it should be a reason to attack someone. The US tries to act high and mighty but remember they are only country to ever use a nuclear weapon on another nation...2 nukes in fact.They don't have a leg to stand on.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I don't care if Syria or anyone else has nukes,chemical weapons anything...that's their thing not mine and I don't think it should be a reason to attack someone. The US tries to act high and mighty but remember they are only country to ever use a nuclear weapon on another nation...2 nukes in fact.They don't have a leg to stand on.

And it was a democrat who gave the ok to do it.

 

[Dissent]

I know this. It was also a Democrat in Kennedy who talked to the Soviets and they managed to not start world war 3 when the Soviets put missiles in Cuba. Talking makes things better war doesn't.Course minding ones own business helps as well.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I know this. It was also a Democrat in Kennedy who talked to the Soviets and they managed to not start world war 3 when the Soviets put missiles in Cuba. Talking makes things better war doesn't.Course minding ones own business helps as well.

I understand just making sure that others understand that.

 

[JoeB131]

Why do idiots always see things in a democrat vs republican light? Its government vs people. In this case the government needs to stay the fuck out of Syria's problems and let them deal with it.

Considering the same scare tactic got us into IRAQ and some democrats opposed going to Iraq, why is it that they would support going to Syria for the exact same reason, and obama claimed to be against going into Iraq. What changed?

Well, for one thing, Syria has admitted that it has chemical weapons, has used them, and there's a real possibility that if the government collapses, they might either be used or fall into the wrong hands.

 

[Dissent]

Then the CIA needs to stop funding the rebels with arms and money and Syria's government won't fall.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Why do idiots always see things in a democrat vs republican light? Its government vs people. In this case the government needs to stay the fuck out of Syria's problems and let them deal with it.

Considering the same scare tactic got us into IRAQ and some democrats opposed going to Iraq, why is it that they would support going to Syria for the exact same reason, and obama claimed to be against going into Iraq. What changed?

Well, for one thing, Syria has admitted that it has chemical weapons, has used them, and there's a real possibility that if the government collapses, they might either be used or fall into the wrong hands.

So now you beat the war drum again? Will you fight for obama?

 

[Saigon]

BigReb -

I know you are going to dodge and dodge and dodge here, but lt's try one more time:

Do you oppose all and any support for the Syrian rebels?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

BigReb -

I know you are going to dodge and dodge and dodge here, but lt's try one more time:

Do you oppose all and any support for the Syrian rebels?

Don't say anything about me dodging anything when you do it yourself. they're al qaeda let the bastards rot in hell.

 

[Unkotare]

Didn't you go into Iraq to find the WMD? ?

That was one reason.

 

[Saigon]

. they're al qaeda let the bastards rot in hell.

Ok, so you would not support the Syrian rebels.

That's fair - I just think there needs to be some logic and consistency in these policies.


I don't think the US should commit land troops into Syria (or Iran) and should not have done in Iraq, but I thought the use of force in Libya was appropriate and effective. As for backing Syrian rebels, I'm not sure. I'm glad I don't have to make that decision. But probably I would help them some way, if not militarily.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Don't say anything about me dodging anything when you do it yourself. they're al qaeda let the bastards rot in hell.

Ok, so you would not support the Syrian rebels.

That's fair - I just think there needs to be some logic and consistency in these policies.


I don't think the US should ............

You don't have a fucking say on the issue,

 

[Papageorgio]

. they're al qaeda let the bastards rot in hell.

Ok, so you would not support the Syrian rebels.

That's fair - I just think there needs to be some logic and consistency in these policies.


I don't think the US should commit land troops into Syria (or Iran) and should not have done in Iraq, but I thought the use of force in Libya was appropriate and effective. As for backing Syrian rebels, I'm not sure. I'm glad I don't have to make that decision. But probably I would help them some way, if not militarily.

Libya was a bad decision, we are not the police.

 

[Katzndogz]

obama supported the Syrian rebels for the same reason he supported the Libyan rebels. They are terrorists, most likely Al Quaeda under the muslim brotherhood umbrella.

Had obama not supported the terrorist rebels, Assad would have put the rebellion down long ago and so many people would not have died.

 

[Saigon]

Don't say anything about me dodging anything when you do it yourself. they're al qaeda let the bastards rot in hell.

Ok, so you would not support the Syrian rebels.

That's fair - I just think there needs to be some logic and consistency in these policies.


I don't think the US should ............

You don't have a fucking say on the issue,

I didn't realise you did....are you Hillary Clinton, by any chance?

 

[Saigon]

obama supported the Syrian rebels for the same reason he supported the Libyan rebels. They are terrorists, most likely Al Quaeda under the muslim brotherhood umbrella.

Had obama not supported the terrorist rebels, Assad would have put the rebellion down long ago and so many people would not have died.

This is, once again, just childish and offensive, Katz.

Do you support the Islamic dictatorship of Assad, btw?

 

[Katzndogz]

obama supported the Syrian rebels for the same reason he supported the Libyan rebels. They are terrorists, most likely Al Quaeda under the muslim brotherhood umbrella.

Had obama not supported the terrorist rebels, Assad would have put the rebellion down long ago and so many people would not have died.

This is, once again, just childish and offensive, Katz.

Do you support the Islamic dictatorship of Assad, btw?

I recognize that for whatever reason, the people who live in that corner of the world are not capable of a representative democracy. While an oppressive dictator is necessary to keep those countries peaceful nationally with their neighboring countries, locally what government there is exists because of warlords that rule over the villages. Usually even more oppressive than the national leadership.