what are the chances Congrees will give authorization?

[jon_berzerk]

The evidence that this administration says exists, claims that the use of chemical weapons points to Assad. This regime is quite capable of manufacturing any evidence it wants. Or, just release a report that says there is evidence. There doesn't need to be evidence. They can say the evidence came from Israel. That doesn't mean it did. It just means that this lying regime totally lacking in credibility says it came from Israel.

Whatever evidence exists has been presented to the UN and to Britian. They are not convinced. The evidence is tainted or manufactured.

perhaps both

now that morsi has failed

time for the prezbo to help

the Syrian terrorists to rise in power

 

[Vox]

The evidence that this administration says exists, claims that the use of chemical weapons points to Assad. This regime is quite capable of manufacturing any evidence it wants. Or, just release a report that says there is evidence. There doesn't need to be evidence. They can say the evidence came from Israel. That doesn't mean it did. It just means that this lying regime totally lacking in credibility says it came from Israel.

Whatever evidence exists has been presented to the UN and to Britian. They are not convinced. The evidence is tainted or manufactured.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Katzndogz writes without evidence: "This regime is quite capable of manufacturing any evidence it wants. Or, just release a report that says there is evidence."

 

[Vox]

We can either face WMD in the ME or we can face it here. What's your choice?

Sure. Let’s just make the random assertion that for some reason that you cannot pin down, going to war with Syria (or Iraq for that matter) is going to lessen the chances of terrorist attacks here with WMD.

Of course the reality is that it INCREASES that possibility but don’t let that get in your way. Killing peoples families, no matter how justified, makes for some zealous warriors and there is no faster way to lose control of a chemical or other wmd storage than removing the agency that happens to be controlling it.

Tell me, name ONE logical way that going to war with Iraq lessened the terrorist WMD threat? Do the same for Syria.

Like there arent enough people hating us in the ME already.

The war with Iraq convinced Muammar Ghaddaffi to give up his nuclear weapons program. Ghaddaffi had been a state sponsor of terrorism for about 30 years.

If we allow people to use chemical weapons then their use will increase because the penalty for doing so is small. If we increase the penalty to unacceptable levels then we will see less use.
It's pretty simple. At least if you aren't a chicken shit isolationist getting your ideas from Ron Paul's ass.

There is no Gaddafi left ( and it did serve us very well in the end, didn't it?) and there is no threat except Iran.
Syria is IRRELEVANT.

FOR US.

There is absolutely no need to stretch muscles with irrelevant enemy and that's enemy no matter who is ruling - Assad or the rebels. The rebels are, probably, much worse, if one can make any sound conclusions on the results of "arab spring".

CW have been used in the ME for the last 20 years at least and we never cared.
So it is not an argument - don't fall into the leftard propaganda trap.

 

[Katzndogz]

Whatever "evidence" obama has, it hasn't convinced anyone. It hasn't convinced the Arab League. They looked at the evidence and said "uh no. Count us out". Democrats believe it because they will believe anything this regime says. The history of altered, adjusted and manufactured reports is too long. Look at what the regime did to global warming! They lied about that.

The obama regime has a long history of lying. obama has reached his "boy who cried wolf" moment. He's not believed.

 

[Mac1958]

.

We still think we're the world's policeman.

We are so full of ourselves.

Man oh man, I hate to see this.

.

We can either face WMD in the ME or we can face it here. What's your choice?

If only life were that simple.

There are several potential significant unintended consequences of bombing Syria, ousting Assad, or both. Surely you know what they are, I'm not going to bother listing them. If you don't know what they are, I'd invite you to do some research.

I'll give a hint about one of them: When we captured and killed Saddam because the American people were terrified about mushroom clouds that weren't going to happen, we greatlly assisted Iran by politely removing the one mitigating regional military influence they had to deal with. And now look at them.

We're going to yet again kick a hornet's nest because we somehow think it's our job to.

.

 

[Vox]

Oh, please, stop that bogus claim that we SUDDENLY need to address CW usage in the ME - it has been used by various dictators there at least for the last 20 years, including Assad, the latest being in last December - and not even a peep of outrage or concern for "poor children dying" - and SUDDENLY such a dire necessity?

 

[The Rabbi]

Sure. Let’s just make the random assertion that for some reason that you cannot pin down, going to war with Syria (or Iraq for that matter) is going to lessen the chances of terrorist attacks here with WMD.

Of course the reality is that it INCREASES that possibility but don’t let that get in your way. Killing peoples families, no matter how justified, makes for some zealous warriors and there is no faster way to lose control of a chemical or other wmd storage than removing the agency that happens to be controlling it.

Tell me, name ONE logical way that going to war with Iraq lessened the terrorist WMD threat? Do the same for Syria.

Like there arent enough people hating us in the ME already.

The war with Iraq convinced Muammar Ghaddaffi to give up his nuclear weapons program. Ghaddaffi had been a state sponsor of terrorism for about 30 years.

If we allow people to use chemical weapons then their use will increase because the penalty for doing so is small. If we increase the penalty to unacceptable levels then we will see less use.
It's pretty simple. At least if you aren't a chicken shit isolationist getting your ideas from Ron Paul's ass.

There are more than enough but morons like you want to make MORE and then think it is a good idea. Then we prosecute a war based on ‘intelligence’ that makes no conceivable sense that Syria used chemicals. Of course it would make no sense for them to do so, tons for the rebels to do so AND (above all) we were DIGGING for this excuse long before it even came out.

If you were not a warmongering idiot getting your ideas out of the end of the GOP’s dick perhaps you would notice that the wars we have been prosecuting have only WEAKENED our military and international influence.

It doesnt matter how many we "make". Even that construct is completely wrong. Unless we adopt sharia law and declare the next caliphate there will be enough terrorists in the ME that hate us to be a threat. It doesnt take many people to pull off a terrorist attack. The whole argument of "we are making them hate us" is wrong.
It makes perfect sense for Assad to use chem weapons. It also makes perfect sense for the rebels to do so. Unlike the posters here I am not an expert on intelligence sources so cannot say for sure what is going on.
I do know that Obama's mouth has written a check his ass cannot cash. It is a shit sandwich. Backing down will encourage Islamist terrorists, just as Clinton's actions in Somalia encouraged OBL.

 

[The Rabbi]

.

We still think we're the world's policeman.

We are so full of ourselves.

Man oh man, I hate to see this.

.

We can either face WMD in the ME or we can face it here. What's your choice?

If only life were that simple.

There are several potential significant unintended consequences of bombing Syria, ousting Assad, or both. Surely you know what they are, I'm not going to bother listing them. If you don't know what they are, I'd invite you to do some research.

I'll give a hint about one of them: When we captured and killed Saddam because the American people were terrified about mushroom clouds that weren't going to happen, we greatlly assisted Iran by politely removing the one mitigating regional military influence they had to deal with. And now look at them.

We're going to yet again kick a hornet's nest because we somehow think it's our job to.

.

A better team in charge would have game planned all that.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Really, there is no evidence at all that Assad used them.

Already exposed and exploded. The evidence points right at Assad.

All we have is fabricated Intelligence from Israel! NO credibility to any of it! We need no more wars fought for Israel!

That's a great point. When we say we have intelligence the CW missiles came from state-controlled neighborhoods, and there was chatter about it, what we wouldn't say is whether that intelligence was ours or Israel's, even if it WAS given to us from Israel.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Sherri, you are no intelligence operative, merely a poster on the Board like all of us sifting the information. The government is right to have "high confidence" in its story.

If the US hits Syria, and if there is any nonsense out of Hezbollah, Israeli supported by massive US assets will root it up for once and all.

What I am is an American citizen who has watched my country rely on false intelligence to start unlawful wars. WITH Iraq, we had false Intelligence from Israel and we see the same thing happening again. I do not support killing more babies and innocent civilians in the ME for Israel. YOu want to kill babies for Israel, go buy an airline ticket. Leave the rest of us Americans out of it.

You have every right to your beliefs, but you are on the wrong side of this. End of story.

Being on the side of peace is the wrong side?

 

[FA_Q2]

What I am is an American citizen who has watched my country rely on false intelligence to start unlawful wars. WITH Iraq, we had false Intelligence from Israel and we see the same thing happening again. I do not support killing more babies and innocent civilians in the ME for Israel. YOu want to kill babies for Israel, go buy an airline ticket. Leave the rest of us Americans out of it.

You have every right to your beliefs, but you are on the wrong side of this. End of story.

Being on the side of peace is the wrong side?

Oh how quickly we forget the repercussions of the Iraq war and repeat the exact same mistakes. Right here there are so many already willing to jump right on the war bandwagon for nothing more than a suspicion that the regime is killing terrorists with chemicals. The sad part is that there is really only one other power block over there that might take over and they are connected with the real threat.

That is what we are doing – putting the true extremists into power.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Obama does not need Congressional authorization to attack Syria. The War Powers Resolution gives the President the power to commit armed forces to military action. It allows armed forces to advance the fighting for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period. All without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war from Congress.

Without looking it up, I believe you are correct.

He's not.

Avalon Project - War Powers Resolution

It appears in Section 8 SS 2(c) and (d) indicate you are correct.
Nevertheless, Obama has shown he is willing to go above and beyond the legal limitations of his Office to further his agenda..
We shall see if he once again plays fast and loose with the law.

 

[The Rabbi]

You have every right to your beliefs, but you are on the wrong side of this. End of story.

Being on the side of peace is the wrong side?

Oh how quickly we forget the repercussions of the Iraq war and repeat the exact same mistakes. Right here there are so many already willing to jump right on the war bandwagon for nothing more than a suspicion that the regime is killing terrorists with chemicals. The sad part is that there is really only one other power block over there that might take over and they are connected with the real threat.

That is what we are doing – putting the true extremists into power.

Remind me what mistakes we made. There actually weren't any. Or any that matter that much, in the context of something so complex as waging war.
We have more than a suspicion that Assad is using CW. And to let it go will invite greater and greater use of CW in the future. In any case, no one is proposing a full on invasion of Syria.
If we had more involvement we could direct events better.

 

[Contumacious]

Being on the side of peace is the wrong side?

Oh how quickly we forget the repercussions of the Iraq war and repeat the exact same mistakes. Right here there are so many already willing to jump right on the war bandwagon for nothing more than a suspicion that the regime is killing terrorists with chemicals. The sad part is that there is really only one other power block over there that might take over and they are connected with the real threat.

That is what we are doing – putting the true extremists into power.

Remind me what mistakes we made. There actually weren't any. Or any that matter that much, in the context of something so complex as waging war.
We have more than a suspicion that Assad is using CW. And to let it go will invite greater and greater use of CW in the future. In any case, no one is proposing a full on invasion of Syria.
If we had more involvement we could direct events better.

Are you a Zionist, war profiteer, a retard?

Will Syria consider the Tomahaws as a good will gesture?


.

 

[The Rabbi]

Oh how quickly we forget the repercussions of the Iraq war and repeat the exact same mistakes. Right here there are so many already willing to jump right on the war bandwagon for nothing more than a suspicion that the regime is killing terrorists with chemicals. The sad part is that there is really only one other power block over there that might take over and they are connected with the real threat.

That is what we are doing – putting the true extremists into power.

Remind me what mistakes we made. There actually weren't any. Or any that matter that much, in the context of something so complex as waging war.
We have more than a suspicion that Assad is using CW. And to let it go will invite greater and greater use of CW in the future. In any case, no one is proposing a full on invasion of Syria.
If we had more involvement we could direct events better.

Are you a Zionist, war profiteer, a retard?

Will Syria consider the Tomahaws as a good will gesture?


.

Are you asking because you want to see if I share all your interests?

What is Syria going to do about it? Invade Florida? They can't police their own damn country.

 

[Redfish]

Being on the side of peace is the wrong side?

Oh how quickly we forget the repercussions of the Iraq war and repeat the exact same mistakes. Right here there are so many already willing to jump right on the war bandwagon for nothing more than a suspicion that the regime is killing terrorists with chemicals. The sad part is that there is really only one other power block over there that might take over and they are connected with the real threat.

That is what we are doing – putting the true extremists into power.

Remind me what mistakes we made. There actually weren't any. Or any that matter that much, in the context of something so complex as waging war.
We have more than a suspicion that Assad is using CW. And to let it go will invite greater and greater use of CW in the future. In any case, no one is proposing a full on invasion of Syria.
If we had more involvement we could direct events better.

I usually agree with you Rabbi, but you are wrong on this. We have no stake in the syrian civil war. There is no american interest that is being threatened.

We need to let them fight it out and kill each other until someone wins. We are not the worlds referee and police force.

What happens is Syria is none of our damn business and it is not worth putting one american life at risk or spending one american dollar to try to control the outcome.

Obama, McCain, Graham, Kerry and the rest of the warmongers are very wrong on this and could be starting WW3. Its fucking lunacy!

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Being on the side of peace is the wrong side?

Oh how quickly we forget the repercussions of the Iraq war and repeat the exact same mistakes. Right here there are so many already willing to jump right on the war bandwagon for nothing more than a suspicion that the regime is killing terrorists with chemicals. The sad part is that there is really only one other power block over there that might take over and they are connected with the real threat.

That is what we are doing – putting the true extremists into power.

Remind me what mistakes we made. There actually weren't any. Or any that matter that much, in the context of something so complex as waging war.
We have more than a suspicion that Assad is using CW. And to let it go will invite greater and greater use of CW in the future. In any case, no one is proposing a full on invasion of Syria.
If we had more involvement we could direct events better.

Killing people for no good reason is a mistake, and history will judge it accordingly someday.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Remind me what mistakes we made. There actually weren't any. Or any that matter that much, in the context of something so complex as waging war.
We have more than a suspicion that Assad is using CW. And to let it go will invite greater and greater use of CW in the future. In any case, no one is proposing a full on invasion of Syria.
If we had more involvement we could direct events better.

Are you a Zionist, war profiteer, a retard?

Will Syria consider the Tomahaws as a good will gesture?


.

Are you asking because you want to see if I share all your interests?

What is Syria going to do about it? Invade Florida? They can't police their own damn country.

And the bolded is exactly the point. Syria is in a civil war, they can't do anything to anybody right now. And for that reason they pose no threat or interest to us. Leave them be until they figure out their end of the mess then we can decide if we want to support what's left or not.

 

[Contumacious]

Remind me what mistakes we made. There actually weren't any. Or any that matter that much, in the context of something so complex as waging war.
We have more than a suspicion that Assad is using CW. And to let it go will invite greater and greater use of CW in the future. In any case, no one is proposing a full on invasion of Syria.
If we had more involvement we could direct events better.

Are you a Zionist, war profiteer, a retard?

Will Syria consider the Tomahaws as a good will gesture?


.

Are you asking because you want to see if I share all your interests?

What is Syria going to do about it? Invade Florida? They can't police their own damn country.

OK , so a retard is the right answer.

You admit that Syria is not a threat to us in any way shape or form but want to bomb the country anyways....

.