War With Syria: Yea Or Nay?

[The T]

Obama is anti-American and our fellow Americans put him in office

America will cease to exist in the context that brave men fought and died for

Thanks you 51% communist

-Geaux

It will IF we let it and cease to remind people of WHOM brought them to the dance to begin with.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

I have not voted in this poll because its not asking the right question. Going to War with Syria and launching a limited missile strike are two different things. You will get different poll results depending how the poll is worded! Unfortunately the mods have closed my poll with the different wording. I hope they re-open it.

Do you believe that will be the end of U.S. military action against Syria?

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Is supplying Syrian rebels with substantial arms and supplies already fighting a war against Syria?

 

[Geaux4it]

I have not voted in this poll because its not asking the right question. Going to War with Syria and launching a limited missile strike are two different things. You will get different poll results depending how the poll is worded! Unfortunately the mods have closed my poll with the different wording. I hope they re-open it.

Launching a missile strike is considered an act of war.

-Geaux

http://www.safehaven.com/article/30969/will-congress-endorse-obamas-war-plans-does-it-matter

President Obama announced this weekend that he has decided to use military force against Syria and would seek authorization from Congress when it returned from its August break. Every Member ought to vote against this reckless and immoral use of the US military. But even if every single Member and Senator votes for another war, it will not make this terrible idea any better because some sort of nod is given to the Constitution along the way.

 

[Indofred]

considering this could turn into a big regional war, why the hell should we get involved?

America, Britain, Russia, France and everyone else should stay out.
All supplying weapons does is extend the war and make for people dead or miserable.

Sadly, Obama is probably getting a sodding great big bribe, either directly or indirectly, from Israel.
You watch when he leaves office, a fat cart load of cash will appear for work as an 'advisor' or whatever.

 

[Indofred]

Is supplying Syrian rebels with substantial arms and supplies already fighting a war against Syria?

No, but it does make you part of the rebel supply chain, thus a legitimate target for military action.
Like it or not, America is now a legitimate target in a war that it should be nowhere near.

 

[Hoffstra]

there are no good guys in this war.

only the civilians....but they both support Assad AND the rebels.

we should let the Arab League handle this.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

considering this could turn into a big regional war, why the hell should we get involved?

America, Britain, Russia, France and everyone else should stay out.
All supplying weapons does is extend the war and make for people dead or miserable.

Sadly, Obama is probably getting a sodding great big bribe, either directly or indirectly, from Israel.
You watch when he leaves office, a fat cart load of cash will appear for work as an 'advisor' or whatever.

The US needs to get out of the business of killing babies for Israel. Just reading another article on Mondoweiss about Israels push behind this war. Let them fight their own wars.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

I have not voted in this poll because its not asking the right question. Going to War with Syria and launching a limited missile strike are two different things. You will get different poll results depending how the poll is worded! Unfortunately the mods have closed my poll with the different wording. I hope they re-open it.

Launching a missile strike is considered an act of war.

-Geaux

Will Congress Endorse Obama's War Plans? Does it Matter? | Ron Paul | Safehaven.com

President Obama announced this weekend that he has decided to use military force against Syria and would seek authorization from Congress when it returned from its August break. Every Member ought to vote against this reckless and immoral use of the US military. But even if every single Member and Senator votes for another war, it will not make this terrible idea any better because some sort of nod is given to the Constitution along the way.

Even if every single member of Congress votes for this war, it will remain unlawful under intl law, an act of aggression, and a war crime.

 

[paulitician]

I have not voted in this poll because its not asking the right question. Going to War with Syria and launching a limited missile strike are two different things. You will get different poll results depending how the poll is worded! Unfortunately the mods have closed my poll with the different wording. I hope they re-open it.

Launching a missile strike is considered an act of war.

-Geaux

Will Congress Endorse Obama's War Plans? Does it Matter? | Ron Paul | Safehaven.com

President Obama announced this weekend that he has decided to use military force against Syria and would seek authorization from Congress when it returned from its August break. Every Member ought to vote against this reckless and immoral use of the US military. But even if every single Member and Senator votes for another war, it will not make this terrible idea any better because some sort of nod is given to the Constitution along the way.

Even if every single member of Congress votes for this war, it will remain unlawful under intl law, an act of aggression, and a war crime.

Short of a valid legal Declaration of War, i would consider it unlawful as well. And I won't support War with Syria regardless of where the UN stands either. Assad and Syria have done nothing to my Nation to warrant hate & War. I would request my Government not take part in any International Military Action against Syria.

 

[RoadVirus]

I say NAY.

I would've said AYE a year ago, but not today.

A year ago, it was Assad vs upset Syrians
Today, it's Assad vs upset Syrians/MB/Al-Queda

We had a chance to support the Syrian uprising on a limited basis (food/medical supplies) while it was confined to Syria. But since outside influences (and i'm not speaking of the West) have decided to join the fray, we'd only be supporting people who hate us.

I supported the US getting involved in Libya because Gaddafi needed to go and the rebellion was still a good majority Libyan and actually praised the US for helping them in the end (i remember reading articles about Pro-US sentiment popping up in rebel-held territories after our involvement began).

 

[U2Edge]

I have not voted in this poll because its not asking the right question. Going to War with Syria and launching a limited missile strike are two different things. You will get different poll results depending how the poll is worded! Unfortunately the mods have closed my poll with the different wording. I hope they re-open it.

Do you believe that will be the end of U.S. military action against Syria?

Yes, because Assad can't afford to have continued US military strikes against his military when its struggling to fight the rebels in his country. Assad stops Chemical weapon use, no more US military strikes. Mission accomplished and Assad continues to fight his war with just conventional weapons like he has done for most of the past 2 and half years.

 

[U2Edge]

Launching a missile strike is considered an act of war.

-Geaux

Will Congress Endorse Obama's War Plans? Does it Matter? | Ron Paul | Safehaven.com

President Obama announced this weekend that he has decided to use military force against Syria and would seek authorization from Congress when it returned from its August break. Every Member ought to vote against this reckless and immoral use of the US military. But even if every single Member and Senator votes for another war, it will not make this terrible idea any better because some sort of nod is given to the Constitution along the way.

Even if every single member of Congress votes for this war, it will remain unlawful under intl law, an act of aggression, and a war crime.

Short of a valid legal Declaration of War, i would consider it unlawful as well. And I won't support War with Syria regardless of where the UN stands either. Assad and Syria have done nothing to my Nation to warrant hate & War. I would request my Government not take part in any International Military Action against Syria.

Did you support United States going to war with Germany in World War II? What did Germany do to the United States that warrented going to war against Germany in 1941?

 

[U2Edge]

I have not voted in this poll because its not asking the right question. Going to War with Syria and launching a limited missile strike are two different things. You will get different poll results depending how the poll is worded! Unfortunately the mods have closed my poll with the different wording. I hope they re-open it.

Launching a missile strike is considered an act of war.

-Geaux

Will Congress Endorse Obama's War Plans? Does it Matter? | Ron Paul | Safehaven.com

President Obama announced this weekend that he has decided to use military force against Syria and would seek authorization from Congress when it returned from its August break. Every Member ought to vote against this reckless and immoral use of the US military. But even if every single Member and Senator votes for another war, it will not make this terrible idea any better because some sort of nod is given to the Constitution along the way.

Even if every single member of Congress votes for this war, it will remain unlawful under intl law, an act of aggression, and a war crime.

Really? So enforcing the international prohibition against the use of chemical weapons is unlawful under international law and a war crime? LOL

 

[Circe]

Yes, because Assad can't afford to have continued US military strikes against his military when its struggling to fight the rebels in his country. Assad stops Chemical weapon use, no more US military strikes. Mission accomplished and Assad continues to fight his war with just conventional weapons like he has done for most of the past 2 and half years.

Or, the war escalates into Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, and finally into Iran, the real target all along. Time to clean up Iran, the administration has decided, IMO; just as the Bush administration decided to use 9/11 to clean up Iraq. "Never let a crisis go to waste."

But that sure didn't work, the Iraq "solve," and I don't like getting lied into WWIII in Iran and against Russia, China, Pakistan, everybody else.

You all should realize that our US immunity to attack from anybody and everybody will someday come to an end: someday, somebody will attack us back.

 

[Circe]

Did you support United States going to war with Germany in World War II? What did Germany do to the United States that warrented going to war against Germany in 1941?

They declared war on us formally the week Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, and started sinking our ships.

 

[U2Edge]

I have not voted in this poll because its not asking the right question. Going to War with Syria and launching a limited missile strike are two different things. You will get different poll results depending how the poll is worded! Unfortunately the mods have closed my poll with the different wording. I hope they re-open it.

Launching a missile strike is considered an act of war.

-Geaux

Will Congress Endorse Obama's War Plans? Does it Matter? | Ron Paul | Safehaven.com

President Obama announced this weekend that he has decided to use military force against Syria and would seek authorization from Congress when it returned from its August break. Every Member ought to vote against this reckless and immoral use of the US military. But even if every single Member and Senator votes for another war, it will not make this terrible idea any better because some sort of nod is given to the Constitution along the way.

So you think invading and occupying Syria with 200,000 US troops is no different than launching a single missile to destroy an empty building in Damascus?

When you use the general term WAR without specifically describing the action to be taken, you have people voting their approval or disapproval based on their visions of what WAR is, as opposed to the actual action that Obama is planning. Essentially, people are voting in the poll based on their many different visions of what WAR is, as opposed to the action that has been suggested. That totally invalidates the poll!

 

[Vox]

i say nay.

i would've said aye a year ago, but not today.

a year ago, it was assad vs upset syrians
today, it's assad vs upset syrians/mb/al-queda

we had a chance to support the syrian uprising on a limited basis (food/medical supplies) while it was confined to syria. But since outside influences (and i'm not speaking of the west) have decided to join the fray, we'd only be supporting people who hate us.

I supported the us getting involved in libya because gaddafi needed to go and the rebellion was still a good majority libyan and actually praised the us for helping them in the end (i remember reading articles about pro-us sentiment popping up in rebel-held territories after our involvement began).

this

 

[U2Edge]

Did you support United States going to war with Germany in World War II? What did Germany do to the United States that warrented going to war against Germany in 1941?

They declared war on us formally the week Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, and started sinking our ships.

So if tomorrow Namibia formally declared war on the United States without any subsequent military action, you would advocate invading and overthrowing the government of Namibia just because of their "formal declaration of war"?

What if Germany had not sunk any ships or declared war on the United States, you would have supported letting Hitler do his thing?

 

[Geaux4it]

I have not voted in this poll because its not asking the right question. Going to War with Syria and launching a limited missile strike are two different things. You will get different poll results depending how the poll is worded! Unfortunately the mods have closed my poll with the different wording. I hope they re-open it.

Launching a missile strike is considered an act of war.

-Geaux

Will Congress Endorse Obama's War Plans? Does it Matter? | Ron Paul | Safehaven.com

President Obama announced this weekend that he has decided to use military force against Syria and would seek authorization from Congress when it returned from its August break. Every Member ought to vote against this reckless and immoral use of the US military. But even if every single Member and Senator votes for another war, it will not make this terrible idea any better because some sort of nod is given to the Constitution along the way.

So you think invading and occupying Syria with 200,000 US troops is no different than launching a single missile to destroy an empty building in Damascus?

When you use the general term WAR without specifically describing the action to be taken, you have people voting their approval or disapproval based on their visions of what WAR is, as opposed to the actual action that Obama is planning. Essentially, people are voting in the poll based on their many different visions of what WAR is, as opposed to the action that has been suggested. That totally invalidates the poll!

I'm sure Syria and Russia would view a missile strike as an act of war. I know we would if tables were turned

-Geaux