War With Syria: Yea Or Nay?

[Hoffstra]

Amazing how this poll seems to reflect the general public.

 

[georgephillip]

Where's your PROOF "they" have used WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION?

We still do not have proof Assad carried out the chemical weapons attack. And if he did, there is no difference between him and the US officials who ordered napalm and white phosphorous to be used against civilians in Iraq. The US uses chemical weapons against civilians. Why is it OK for the US to unlawfully use chemical weapons against civilians but not OK for Assad to do the same?

Napalm and White Phosphorous are not WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION and are not banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty of 1997.

"Washington doesn't merely lack the legal authority for a military intervention in Syria. It lacks the moral authority. We're talking about a government with a history of using chemical weapons against innocent people far more prolific and deadly than the mere accusations Assad faces from a trigger-happy Western military-industrial complex, bent on stifling further investigation before striking.

Here is a list of 10 chemical weapons attacks carried out by the U.S. government or its allies against civilians.

1. The U.S. Military Dumped 20 Million Gallons of Chemicals on Vietnam from 1962 - 1971..."

Greatest Purveyor of Violence on this Planet?
It's not Assad or Russia.
It has maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Muslims on the opposite side of the globe since 2001 and it doesn't SIGN treaties that limit its ability to murder children with toxic substances.

10 Chemical Weapons Attacks Washington Doesn't Want You to Talk About

 

[proudveteran06]

If this had been Bush Senator Obama , Henry Reed, Barbara Boxer and all the other LIBERALS out there would be screaming their heads off !!!!! What Hypocrites

that's not the issue.

we need to bring together the anti-war forces, who cares who they are and how they voted for the Iraq War.

this is about preventing a massive tragedy!!!

How typical . I repeat; If this had been Bush you would have been SCREAMING !! First the world screams that we act like their policeman , then they YELL for us, first thing. Let other Countries do it.

 

[Camp]

We still do not have proof Assad carried out the chemical weapons attack. And if he did, there is no difference between him and the US officials who ordered napalm and white phosphorous to be used against civilians in Iraq. The US uses chemical weapons against civilians. Why is it OK for the US to unlawfully use chemical weapons against civilians but not OK for Assad to do the same?

Napalm and White Phosphorous are not WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION and are not banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty of 1997.

"Washington doesn't merely lack the legal authority for a military intervention in Syria. It lacks the moral authority. We're talking about a government with a history of using chemical weapons against innocent people far more prolific and deadly than the mere accusations Assad faces from a trigger-happy Western military-industrial complex, bent on stifling further investigation before striking.

Here is a list of 10 chemical weapons attacks carried out by the U.S. government or its allies against civilians.

1. The U.S. Military Dumped 20 Million Gallons of Chemicals on Vietnam from 1962 - 1971..."

Greatest Purveyor of Violence on this Planet?
It's not Assad or Russia.
It has maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Muslims on the opposite side of the globe since 2001 and it doesn't SIGN treaties that limit its ability to murder children with toxic substances.

10 Chemical Weapons Attacks Washington Doesn't Want You to Talk About

Great example of a fraudulent story. This is how extreme propaganda is used. Catch the readers eye with a headline. Open with the propaganda purpose. Follow up with bs. Most readers won't go beyond the headline. Most of the one's who do won't go beyond the first paragraph. But the seed is planted. The seed, is that America, and specifiicly the US military has used chemical warfare as a weapon of war to "murder children with toxic substances." Notice also that America gets blamed for "maimed, murdered, 'DISPLACED' and incarcerated millions of 'INNOCENT' Muslims ........since 2001.." So anything and everything bad that has happened in the Muslim world since 9/11 is America's fault. We are directly responsible for causing muslim factions to be killing each other and escape the horror from country to country that are being and have been committed by other muslims. And if you believe this crap, you may conclude that America has been using chemical warfare to do some of it. Yes, it is our fault because we used white phosphorous to create a smoke screen or light up the night, a legal substance to be used in warfare, and that caused some shite muslim insurgent to blow up a market and kill 87 innocent sunni muslims. It's America's fault.

 

[Hossfly]

We still do not have proof Assad carried out the chemical weapons attack. And if he did, there is no difference between him and the US officials who ordered napalm and white phosphorous to be used against civilians in Iraq. The US uses chemical weapons against civilians. Why is it OK for the US to unlawfully use chemical weapons against civilians but not OK for Assad to do the same?

Napalm and White Phosphorous are not WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION and are not banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty of 1997.

"Washington doesn't merely lack the legal authority for a military intervention in Syria. It lacks the moral authority. We're talking about a government with a history of using chemical weapons against innocent people far more prolific and deadly than the mere accusations Assad faces from a trigger-happy Western military-industrial complex, bent on stifling further investigation before striking.

Here is a list of 10 chemical weapons attacks carried out by the U.S. government or its allies against civilians.

1. The U.S. Military Dumped 20 Million Gallons of Chemicals on Vietnam from 1962 - 1971..."

Greatest Purveyor of Violence on this Planet?
It's not Assad or Russia.
It has maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Muslims on the opposite side of the globe since 2001 and it doesn't SIGN treaties that limit its ability to murder children with toxic substances.

10 Chemical Weapons Attacks Washington Doesn't Want You to Talk About

Mindless drivel by the Hamas Publicity Hound.

 

[paulitician]

If this had been Bush Senator Obama , Henry Reed, Barbara Boxer and all the other LIBERALS out there would be screaming their heads off !!!!! What Hypocrites

that's not the issue.

we need to bring together the anti-war forces, who cares who they are and how they voted for the Iraq War.

this is about preventing a massive tragedy!!!

How typical . I repeat; If this had been Bush you would have been SCREAMING !! First the world screams that we act like their policeman , then they YELL for us, first thing. Let other Countries do it.

Being the World's Referee/Policeman is a Win/Win for the World. But it's a sad Lose/Lose for us. They complain about our 'Evil Imperialist interference' while at the same time demanding we get involved with Nations' internal conflicts. Some Nations, even our Allies, just love Monday Morning Quarterbacking us. It's all just a matter of convenience for them. Lets end this sad Catch 22 Foreign Policy. Let other Nations assume the role of World's Referee/Policeman. We've been there done that. It's time for change.

 

[Kondor3]

BTW...

As this Congressional vote gets closer, and as it becomes clear that we DO intend to strike, pending the results of that vote...

If... IF... we DO end-up striking, or otherwise 'go to war' in some fashion or another...

You will see a radical change in my demeanor on the subject of War with Syria...

I will cease protesting against it and advocating against our intervention...

I will continue to advocate against an expansion of our role, but...

I will begin supporting our War Effort, as that unfolds and evolves...

Some of you will see this as hypocritical...

Some of you will see this as a simpleton's naive and blind and servile patriotism...

Others, who have served in uniform yourselves, will better understand the sudden change...

It has to do with not wanting to provide 'Aid and Comfort' to the Enemy, even if that is nothing more than contributing remarks on an Internet -based blogging site or two...

Some will view such a rationale as silly or unrealistic or making a mountain out of a molehill or ego-driven, thinking that such blogging means anything in the outside world...

Should we reach a tipping point (as we did in 'Nam) wherein we are losing a great many people - and the only way to stop our people from dying is to Go Public with opposition (again) in order to contribute a little weight to the collective attempting to get the government to cease hostilities...

Under such circumstances, I reserve for myself the right to flip-flop once again, and resume anti-War protests and advocacy and blogging, for whatever sliver of good or strengthening of the collective that that might do, but...

Barring such unlikely circumstances...

Once we commence war-operations, I will not engage in anti-War advocacy that contributes to the weight of the anti-War movement...

I will be switching camps and beginning to actively support war-operations in my own commentaries, as best I may...

Despite any brickbats which I may be obliged to endure, which attribute to such a shift...

Just wanted to put that on record against what almost certainly looks like a need to invoke it just over the horizon...

Again, stereotypically speaking, those who have served in uniform oftentimes understand that mentality better than those who have not...

< puts-down cover-his-own-ass rule-book and mindset and gets back to anti-War advocacy while there is still time >

 

[Camp]

Being the World's Referee/Policeman is a Win/Win for the World. But it's a sad Lose/Lose for us. They complain about our 'Evil Imperialist interference' while at the same time demanding we get involved with Nations' internal conflicts. Some Nations, even our Allies, just love Monday Morning Quarterbacking us. It's all just a matter of convenience for them. Lets end this sad Catch 22 Foreign Policy. Let other Nations assume the role of World's Referee/Policeman. We've been there done that. It's time for change.

This country made the decision to be the worlds referee/policeman after WWII because we didn't want to get dragged into wars started out of control countries. We have economic interest all over the world. The isolationist policies of of the libertarians like Ron Paul would leave our economy and security at the mercy of rogue dictators, political coups in little foriegn countries in Africa, South America and Asia. It presumes that niether Russia or China would take up that mantal world referee/policeman. Amature, immature poorly thought out consequences is the definition of libertarian ideology. Same can be said about Tea Party. You guys are like interbred cousins.

 

[Camp]

BTW...

As this Congressional vote gets closer, and as it becomes clear that we DO intend to strike, pending the results of that vote...

If... IF... we DO end-up striking, or otherwise 'go to war' in some fashion or another...

You will see a radical change in my demeanor on the subject of War with Syria...

I will cease protesting against it and advocating against our intervention...

I will continue to advocate against an expansion of our role, but...

I will begin supporting our War Effort, as that unfolds and evolves...

Some of you will see this as hypocritical...

Some of you will see this as a simpleton's naive and blind and servile patriotism...

Others, who have served in uniform yourselves, will better understand the sudden change...

It has to do with not wanting to provide 'Aid and Comfort' to the Enemy, even if that is nothing more than contributing remarks on an Internet -based blogging site or two...

Some will view such a rationale as silly or unrealistic or making a mountain out of a molehill or ego-driven, thinking that such blogging means anything in the outside world...

Should we reach a tipping point (as we did in 'Nam) wherein we are losing a great many people - and the only way to stop our people from dying is to Go Public with opposition (again) in order to contribute a little weight to the collective attempting to get the government to cease hostilities...

Under such circumstances, I reserve for myself the right to flip-flop once again, and resume anti-War protests and advocacy and blogging, for whatever sliver of good or strengthening of the collective that that might do, but...

Barring such unlikely circumstances...

Once we commence war-operations, I will not engage in anti-War advocacy that contributes to the weight of the anti-War movement...

I will be switching camps and beginning to actively support war-operations in my own commentaries, as best I may...

Despite any brickbats which I may be obliged to endure, which attribute to such a shift...

Just wanted to put that on record against what almost certainly looks like a need to invoke it just over the horizon...

Again, stereotypically speaking, those who have served in uniform oftentimes understand that mentality better than those who have not...

< puts-down cover-his-own-ass rule-book and mindset and gets back to anti-War advocacy while there is still time >

Don't worry. You can go to an anti-war demonstration wearing a prominent "Jane Fonda-AMERICAN TRAITOR BITCH" patch next to your "SUPPORT OUR VETS" patch and your American flag patch. The good demonstration have good music and lots of pretty girls. Usually there is a small counter demonstration, so if you get bored you can go hang out with those guys. Sometimes it just depends on who is closest to the beer vendor or bar. It's great when people give you dirty looks about your patchs.

 

[Foxfyre]

War is one of the giant indecencies of humankind. Yet the absence of war is not necessarily peace. Had there been no WWII, how many countries would Hitler have annexed to Germany? He exterminated more than six million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, freemasons, and others before he was stopped. If he had not been stopped, how many more would he have starved, ravaged, brutalized, and killed?

If Saddam Hussein had not been stopped from taking over the Kuwait and Saudi oil fields, how much further would he have gone? He commanded the world's fourth largest, well-equipped army at that time. And if he was allowed to control a huge percentage of the world's oil reserves, how would that have affected the free world? How much additional risk would there have been from an ambitious and ruthless dictator?

But then we look at an ambitious Soviet Union that murdered 20 million of their own people, but was brought down economically instead of militarily. But how much further would it had have expanded if it had not been for the USA and others in the free world who were ready to go to war?

But throughout the world, ambitious dictators make war upon their own people, and some of their own people seek to topple the dictator and become dictators themselves.

Is Syria more like Germany and the USSR? Or more like all those other countries that war within their own borders?

And how much responsibility does the free world have for that?

 

[paulitician]

Being the World's Referee/Policeman is a Win/Win for the World. But it's a sad Lose/Lose for us. They complain about our 'Evil Imperialist interference' while at the same time demanding we get involved with Nations' internal conflicts. Some Nations, even our Allies, just love Monday Morning Quarterbacking us. It's all just a matter of convenience for them. Lets end this sad Catch 22 Foreign Policy. Let other Nations assume the role of World's Referee/Policeman. We've been there done that. It's time for change.

This country made the decision to be the worlds referee/policeman after WWII because we didn't want to get dragged into wars started out of control countries. We have economic interest all over the world. The isolationist policies of of the libertarians like Ron Paul would leave our economy and security at the mercy of rogue dictators, political coups in little foriegn countries in Africa, South America and Asia. It presumes that niether Russia or China would take up that mantal world referee/policeman. Amature, immature poorly thought out consequences is the definition of libertarian ideology. Same can be said about Tea Party. You guys are like interbred cousins.

Ron Paul is not an Isolationist. That's just a boring predictable meme, regurgitated by Warmongering Globalists. He's all for free & open Global Trade. Read up a bit more on the man. Don't believe the Socialist/Progressive & Neocon hype. They lie.

 

[toastman]

What are the chances that Obama reads this thread?

 

[Foxfyre]

What are the chances that Obama reads this thread?

Slim to none. But those who control him are reading in on public opinion across the internet so that they can tailor his speeches accordingly. You can be sure that some in the political world are reading in at USMB. Those and millions of others like us here do have power to change minds and affect politcal decisions.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Don't worry. You can go to an anti-war demonstration wearing a prominent 'Jane Fonda-AMERICAN TRAITOR BITCH' patch next to your 'SUPPORT OUR VETS' patch and your American flag patch..."

And thus it begins...

Bringing out the nastiest in the worst amongst us... and that before the shooting even starts (while I'm still on the same side) and I'm obliged to change my tune for the duration... just the hint or prospect of making the switch is damnable and anathema to some...

Been there... done that... got the cookie and the souvenir button... accosted by far better and more talented detractors and denigrators under such circumstances, and survived just fine within various blogging communities...

As I said earlier... someone who has worn the uniform and served is more likely to understand a switch to some kind of 'cease criticizing and support our troops and the mission for the duration' stance...

Having a history in-uniform is no guarantee of agreeing with such a switch or such a stance (and we may even see an exception or two around here, for all I know) but it greatly increases the likelihood that such a stance or such a switch will be understood for what it is...

Suppressing active advocacy for one's own foreign policy preferences or perspective until our kids are out of harms' way again, once they're committed.

But we're not there yet, and we may yet be surprised, and end-up not undertaking this really bad idea of attacking Syria, so... here's hoping...

 

[RandallFlagg]

The missile strike is not targeting chemical stockpiles.

Just saw a video clip of Obama today saying he went to Congress because he was not sure if the chemical attacks caused an immediate threat to the US. Hello- That is what 99% of the people on this board have been saying for days now.

-Geaux[/QUOTE]

I'm sensing desperation now. And that's dangerous. Who knows what he'll concoct next? Stay tuned.

There's something that is terribly important to understand as it relates to Barry.

Barry is a MASTER at turning one group against another, in other words, devisiness. No one has ever doubted that. Look at the condition of race relations right now in America.

When it comes to foreign relations, however, Barry is absolutely and totally lost. We have a president who is clueless. I honestly don't believe that he has a clue as to how the "real" world operates. Barry honestly thought that the world had embraced him as "the one".

Barry is not accustomed to being laughed at by those whom he thought "adored" him and he is pouting. Unfortunately, his passive/aggressiveness might very well get the United States into serious trouble.

Look closely. We are seeing the end of a presidency right before our very eyes.

 

[georgephillip]

Napalm and White Phosphorous are not WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION and are not banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty of 1997.

"Washington doesn't merely lack the legal authority for a military intervention in Syria. It lacks the moral authority. We're talking about a government with a history of using chemical weapons against innocent people far more prolific and deadly than the mere accusations Assad faces from a trigger-happy Western military-industrial complex, bent on stifling further investigation before striking.

Here is a list of 10 chemical weapons attacks carried out by the U.S. government or its allies against civilians.

1. The U.S. Military Dumped 20 Million Gallons of Chemicals on Vietnam from 1962 - 1971..."

Greatest Purveyor of Violence on this Planet?
It's not Assad or Russia.
It has maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Muslims on the opposite side of the globe since 2001 and it doesn't SIGN treaties that limit its ability to murder children with toxic substances.

10 Chemical Weapons Attacks Washington Doesn't Want You to Talk About

Great example of a fraudulent story. This is how extreme propaganda is used. Catch the readers eye with a headline. Open with the propaganda purpose. Follow up with bs. Most readers won't go beyond the headline. Most of the one's who do won't go beyond the first paragraph. But the seed is planted. The seed, is that America, and specifiicly the US military has used chemical warfare as a weapon of war to "murder children with toxic substances." Notice also that America gets blamed for "maimed, murdered, 'DISPLACED' and incarcerated millions of 'INNOCENT' Muslims ........since 2001.." So anything and everything bad that has happened in the Muslim world since 9/11 is America's fault. We are directly responsible for causing muslim factions to be killing each other and escape the horror from country to country that are being and have been committed by other muslims. And if you believe this crap, you may conclude that America has been using chemical warfare to do some of it. Yes, it is our fault because we used white phosphorous to create a smoke screen or light up the night, a legal substance to be used in warfare, and that caused some shite muslim insurgent to blow up a market and kill 87 innocent sunni muslims. It's America's fault.

"In 2004, journalists embedded with the U.S. military in Iraq began reporting the use of white phosphorus in Fallujah against Iraqi insurgents.

"First the military lied and said that it was only using white phosphorus to create smokescreens or illuminate targets.

"Then it admitted to using the volatile chemical as an incendiary weapon.

"At the time, Italian television broadcaster RAI aired a documentary entitled, 'Fallujah, The Hidden Massacre,' including grim video footage and photographs, as well as eyewitness interviews with Fallujah residents and U.S. soldiers revealing how the U.S. government indiscriminately rained white chemical fire down on the Iraqi city and melted women and children to death."

10 Chemical Weapons Attacks Washington Doesn't Want You to Talk About

 

[georgephillip]

Napalm and White Phosphorous are not WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION and are not banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty of 1997.

"Washington doesn't merely lack the legal authority for a military intervention in Syria. It lacks the moral authority. We're talking about a government with a history of using chemical weapons against innocent people far more prolific and deadly than the mere accusations Assad faces from a trigger-happy Western military-industrial complex, bent on stifling further investigation before striking.

Here is a list of 10 chemical weapons attacks carried out by the U.S. government or its allies against civilians.

1. The U.S. Military Dumped 20 Million Gallons of Chemicals on Vietnam from 1962 - 1971..."

Greatest Purveyor of Violence on this Planet?
It's not Assad or Russia.
It has maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Muslims on the opposite side of the globe since 2001 and it doesn't SIGN treaties that limit its ability to murder children with toxic substances.

10 Chemical Weapons Attacks Washington Doesn't Want You to Talk About

Mindless drivel by the Hamas Publicity Hound.

How's the Agent Orange tasting now, Killer?

 

[Foxfyre]

Not only that, but our fearless leader seems to have no moral center of any kind, holds no convictions of any kind other than he doesn't like America very much, is incapable of being straight forward and honest about anything, and acts on nothing unless he is convinced it will increase his messiah mystique:

August 30--Syria is a threat to our national interests
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uU0C2FDn3xU]President Barack Obama Syria FULL Statement. 8/30/2013 - YouTube[/ame]

Sept 6--Complete flip flop

I think it would be a mistake for me to jump the gun and speculate, because right now I’m working to get as much support as possible out of Congress.

But I’ll repeat something that I said in Sweden when I was asked a similar question. I did not put this before Congress, you know, just as a political ploy or as symbolism. I put it before Congress because I could not honestly claim that the threat posed by Assad’s use of chemical weapons on innocent civilians and women and children posed an imminent, direct threat to the United States. In that situation, obviously, I don’t worry about Congress; we do what we have to do to keep the American people safe.

I could not say that it was immediately directly going to have an impact on our allies. Again, in those situations, I would act right away. This wasn’t even a situation like Libya, where, you know, you’ve got troops rolling towards Benghazi and you have a concern about time, in terms of saving somebody right away.
Obama advisor: He won?t attack Syria if Congress votes no « Hot Air

Personal note: Of course when there was a direct threat on Benghazi that killed four of our embassy personnel and wounded dozens of others . . . .no action on our part whatsoever.

The man is a putz

 

[Wyld Kard]

Gee, how convenient. Assad has become the Chemical Weapons Boogeyman they desperately wanted him to be. Way too convenient if you ask me. I'm not buying our Government's story on this.

It is way too convient. Obama's handlers need a reason to reason to "justify" actions that would otherwise be widely opposed.

Without the lie about "chemical weapons" (an invented problem), they would never have been able to sell the 'solution' - a military strike on Syria.

Just like when GWB was prez, without the lie about "weapons of mass destruction" (an invented problem), they would never have been able to sell the 'solution' - an invasion of Iraq.

Basically it's the same routine, different location.

Yeah, ole Assad sure did play along perfectly huh? Their story falls apart under closer scrutiny.

You're right about that!

 

[Hossfly]

"Washington doesn't merely lack the legal authority for a military intervention in Syria. It lacks the moral authority. We're talking about a government with a history of using chemical weapons against innocent people far more prolific and deadly than the mere accusations Assad faces from a trigger-happy Western military-industrial complex, bent on stifling further investigation before striking.

Here is a list of 10 chemical weapons attacks carried out by the U.S. government or its allies against civilians.

1. The U.S. Military Dumped 20 Million Gallons of Chemicals on Vietnam from 1962 - 1971..."

Greatest Purveyor of Violence on this Planet?
It's not Assad or Russia.
It has maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Muslims on the opposite side of the globe since 2001 and it doesn't SIGN treaties that limit its ability to murder children with toxic substances.

10 Chemical Weapons Attacks Washington Doesn't Want You to Talk About

Mindless drivel by the Hamas Publicity Hound.

How's the Agent Orange tasting now, Killer?

Why, Georgie Boy (you little wimp who got out of basic training after only ten days because of faking a bad back) don't you tell us how many of your homeboys killed innocent people in Los Angeles this week? I read in one of the Los Angeles papers today that one has been sentenced for killing some Hispanics. It must be a war zone, but Georgie Boy stays safe in his little subsidized apartment. This way Georgie boy is out of harm's way while he obsesses over the Vietnam War and his hatred of America. I guess his Commie counterparts in Russia can't find him a subsidized apartment plus he is too old to be able to master the Russian language. Hmm, wonder if they have Meals on Wheels in Russia to feed the Seniors who don't get out..