Perhaps you misunderstood me. First, I never mentioned president Bush. Second, I was simply trying to correct a clearly false statement blaming our current president for our decades old wars. Nothing more nothing less. Don't let pesky facts cloud your judgment.
False it was not for you see only part of the matter. Who has the power to stop this madness? Obama!
Have we not withdrawn most of our troops from Iraq? Are there not plans to cut our military presence in Afghanistan roughly in half by early 2014 and totally by the end of 2014? What exactly do you want here? I think you're looking at it like taking over a failing restaurant. Just hire all new staff and change the menu right? I don't think it's that simple. However, I don't think our discussion really has much to do with what this thread was about. I thinks scarlin pretty well hit the nail on the head there.
We seem to be caught in an infinite loop is the problem you miss. We remove troops from one country and place more there in an another country and all the while the cost of war only increases as people in THIS country go hungry for lack of assistance. I stand by my statements as I look towards the bigger picture. Think what you will and I'll do the same, but the facts speak for themselves. Failing restaurant..........That's funny. :-)
Perhaps you misunderstood me. First, I never mentioned president Bush. Second, I was simply trying to correct a clearly false statement blaming our current president for our decades old wars. Nothing more nothing less. Don't let pesky facts cloud your judgment.
False it was not for you see only part of the matter. Who has the power to stop this madness? Obama!
Have we not withdrawn most of our troops from Iraq? Are there not plans to cut our military presence in Afghanistan roughly in half by early 2014 and totally by the end of 2014? What exactly do you want here? I think you're looking at it like taking over a failing restaurant. Just hire all new staff and change the menu right? I don't think it's that simple. However, I don't think our discussion really has much to do with what this thread was about. I thinks scarlin pretty well hit the nail on the head there.
We seem to be caught in an infinite loop is the problem you miss. We remove troops from one country and place more there in an another country and all the while the cost of war only increases as people in THIS country go hungry for lack of assistance. I stand by my statements as I look towards the bigger picture. Think what you will and I'll do the same, but the facts speak for themselves. Failing restaurant..........That's funny. :-)
I think Obama said he would not put troops on the ground in Syria. Not sure where I heard that though. Also in regards to the amount of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan: Iraq only has the 160 members of embassy security left and Afghanistan will see roughly 20,000 troops leave in Dec2013-Jan2014 putting the total number at just 32,000 left. Most of which are Special Forces, Intel, Counterterrorism, and Training forces. The hope is to be almost fully withdrawn by the end of 2014.
Perhaps you misunderstood me. First, I never mentioned president Bush. Second, I was simply trying to correct a clearly false statement blaming our current president for our decades old wars. Nothing more nothing less. Don't let pesky facts cloud your judgment.
False it was not for you see only part of the matter. Who has the power to stop this madness? Obama!
Have we not withdrawn most of our troops from Iraq? Are there not plans to cut our military presence in Afghanistan roughly in half by early 2014 and totally by the end of 2014? What exactly do you want here? I think you're looking at it like taking over a failing restaurant. Just hire all new staff and change the menu right? I don't think it's that simple. However, I don't think our discussion really has much to do with what this thread was about. I thinks scarlin pretty well hit the nail on the head there.
We seem to be caught in an infinite loop is the problem you miss. We remove troops from one country and place more there in an another country and all the while the cost of war only increases as people in THIS country go hungry for lack of assistance. I stand by my statements as I look towards the bigger picture. Think what you will and I'll do the same, but the facts speak for themselves. Failing restaurant..........That's funny. :-)
I think Obama said he would not put troops on the ground in Syria. Not sure where I heard that though. Also in regards to the amount of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan: Iraq only has the 160 members of embassy security left and Afghanistan will see roughly 20,000 troops leave in Dec2013-Jan2014 putting the total number at just 32,000 left. Most of which are Special Forces, Intel, Counterterrorism, and Training forces. The hope is to be almost fully withdrawn by the end of 2014.
One thing I have learned in over forty-seven years is simply this: Wait and see. Who knows what tomorrow will bring in politics? Certainly not I. My point is that even if we remove every man deployed overseas today, something else will arise by the end of the year and here we go again.
I'm hoping all countries involved will listen to the evidence on this. You know I don't know what is worse, the false chest beating from our country and our allies or the BS that Assad is swinging? Or hell even that Russia keeps standing up for this country when/or if they have used these weapons. Though really killing is killing and it really doesn't matter how it is done does it? Sad thing is Obama had to go a head and beat his chest too, now they are walking back statements. It's one thing for some whack-a-doo congress person or senator to beat their chest and attack, it's another for the president to do so. I thought we didn't have a cowboy in office anymore.
"We're not going to be in a position to provide all of the evidence that has been collected," he said. Still, he asserted there is a "preponderance of publicly available evidence to indicate that the Assad regime carried out chemical weapons attacks in Syria."
Earnest said lawmakers who have seen the full assessment, such as Senate intelligence committee chairwoman Diane Feinstein and the panel's top Republican, Saxby Chambliss, have found it to be persuasive that the Assad government was behind the attack.
So if Diane says it's okay I guess we should believe her, I mean she knows all about rights and law and all that stuff. Oh and aparently there's a lot of evidence out there, but we can't know the real meaty stuff. Give me a freaking break. They might as well have someone hold of a vile of white stuff and "we know where they are .... here, there, and around here" on a big board. This is pathetic.
So if Diane says it's okay I guess we should believe her, I mean she knows all about rights and law and all that stuff.
Are you serious?
...no, I am not. California voters need to clean house and start with her and work their way down a bit. I'm sick of these people who say one thing and then keep doing the opposite. I cannot believe the skin on this witch over how she has handled not only the policy of this war making but how she treats fellow senators when they challenge her on this bogus crap.
One other thing that bothers me in this instance is the lack of the question of CAN we intervene, do we really have the capability? Perhaps someone who is active can correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like our units, particularly the combat arms, are worn out and need time to recover. Perhaps the Air Force and Navy elements that were not too heavily engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan, but if that's the thinking those in charge need to do some reading from, ohhhh say, 1975 and 2003 to see that that is not a very effective solution against low-tech enemies.
One other thing that bothers me in this instance is the lack of the question of CAN we intervene, do we really have the capability? Perhaps someone who is active can correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like our units, particularly the combat arms, are worn out and need time to recover. Perhaps the Air Force and Navy elements that were not too heavily engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan, but if that's the thinking those in charge need to do some reading from, ohhhh say, 1975 and 2003 to see that that is not a very effective solution against low-tech enemies.
Amen!
I think sometimes it's necessary to map out the logic of proposed solutions, as well as reviewing the history. The history? It's never worked to our advantage, yet we keep proposing the same actions. The Logic? Let's see, if dictator X uses "weapons of mass destruction", we're going to hit him from the sky with (wait for it)...............weapons of mass destruction! That's what missiles are, they do not discriminate, knocking door to door and asking "are you Bashir?". They (WE) just blow up, destroy and kill whatever gets in the way. Real moral authority, isn't it? .
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Very interesting indeed. I've not heard a word of this.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
One other thing that bothers me in this instance is the lack of the question of CAN we intervene, do we really have the capability? Perhaps someone who is active can correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like our units, particularly the combat arms, are worn out and need time to recover. Perhaps the Air Force and Navy elements that were not too heavily engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan, but if that's the thinking those in charge need to do some reading from, ohhhh say, 1975 and 2003 to see that that is not a very effective solution against low-tech enemies.
Amen!
I think sometimes it's necessary to map out the logic of proposed solutions, as well as reviewing the history. The history? It's never worked to our advantage, yet we keep proposing the same actions. The Logic? Let's see, if dictator X uses "weapons of mass destruction", we're going to hit him from the sky with (wait for it)...............weapons of mass destruction! That's what missiles are, they do not discriminate, knocking door to door and asking "are you Bashir?". They (WE) just blow up, destroy and kill whatever gets in the way. Real moral authority, isn't it? .
We could send in the TSA. They're the ones with all the ammunition.
I was suspecting something like that or a crazy field commander. Assad is a *** but he isn't suicidal. Though if this is all true then the west is going to look like morons and the US and France especially. Like what has been said, why is there never any hard questions anymore or why are we so quick to use military action? WTF!? We obviously have unlimited money for war but not *** for our own country's well being. Makes me freaking sick. One of the reasons why you know that we no longer live in a democracy, we are a Empire and have been for decades.
Off topic from the last two posts, but is anyone else seeing this?
Heads of State (Obama, PM,..) : WE MUST TAKE ACTION AGAINST SYRIA THIS CANNOT GO UNNOTICED. *5 minutes later* LETS CONSULT CONGRESS AND PARLIAMENT FIRST THOUGH AND SECRETLY HOPE THEY SAY NO.
I gotta say Obama is brilliant. He just said that he has authorized a strike but wants congress to approve it. So, no matter what, he has stood by his 'red line' and when Congress says no way, then he will blame them. Simply brilliant.
I gotta say Obama is brilliant. He just said that he has authorized a strike but wants congress to approve it. So, no matter what, he has stood by his 'red line' and when Congress says no way, then he will blame them. Simply brilliant.
I was thinking the same thing. no matter what happens now he can just say it was not his fault.
I gotta say Obama is brilliant. He just said that he has authorized a strike but wants congress to approve it. So, no matter what, he has stood by his 'red line' and when Congress says no way, then he will blame them. Simply brilliant.
I was thinking the same thing. no matter what happens now he can just say it was not his fault.
And still yet it will be him at fault because he has the Veto power. In a situation of wartime he has the last word. So either way he looses.
One other thing that bothers me in this instance is the lack of the question of CAN we intervene, do we really have the capability? Perhaps someone who is active can correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like our units, particularly the combat arms, are worn out and need time to recover. Perhaps the Air Force and Navy elements that were not too heavily engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan, but if that's the thinking those in charge need to do some reading from, ohhhh say, 1975 and 2003 to see that that is not a very effective solution against low-tech enemies.
Amen!
I think sometimes it's necessary to map out the logic of proposed solutions, as well as reviewing the history. The history? It's never worked to our advantage, yet we keep proposing the same actions. The Logic? Let's see, if dictator X uses "weapons of mass destruction", we're going to hit him from the sky with (wait for it)...............weapons of mass destruction! That's what missiles are, they do not discriminate, knocking door to door and asking "are you Bashir?". They (WE) just blow up, destroy and kill whatever gets in the way. Real moral authority, isn't it? .
We could send in the TSA. They're the ones with all the ammunition.
Gotta say, that made me laugh out loud.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
I gotta say Obama is brilliant. He just said that he has authorized a strike but wants congress to approve it. So, no matter what, he has stood by his 'red line' and when Congress says no way, then he will blame them. Simply brilliant.
I was thinking the same thing. no matter what happens now he can just say it was not his fault.
And still yet it will be him at fault because he has the Veto power. In a situation of wartime he has the last word. So either way he looses.
Except that the media will tell the public that Obama did the right thing and congress is to blame and the stupid people will believe the media.
Let's have a show of hands: Who still hopes for change?
“It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)
Very interesting indeed. I've not heard a word of this.
Sadly when CNN, Fox, etc. won the US supreme court decision a decade ago that ruled that 'news' is entertainment...and doesnt need to b based upon evidence....and that everyone 'knows' that' it just totally transformed how biased information can and is presented. Beyond crazy.
I gotta say Obama is brilliant. He just said that he has authorized a strike but wants congress to approve it. So, no matter what, he has stood by his 'red line' and when Congress says no way, then he will blame them. Simply brilliant.
I was thinking the same thing. no matter what happens now he can just say it was not his fault.
And still yet it will be him at fault because he has the Veto power. In a situation of wartime he has the last word. So either way he looses.
Except that the media will tell the public that Obama did the right thing and congress is to blame and the stupid people will believe the media.
Very interesting indeed. I've not heard a word of this.
Sadly when CNN, Fox, etc. won the US supreme court decision a decade ago that ruled that 'news' is entertainment...and doesnt need to b based upon evidence....and that everyone 'knows' that' it just totally transformed how biased information can and is presented. Beyond crazy.
This is the advantage of the BBC, it doesn't rely on ratings to survive and therefore doesn't (at least not often) have to pander to any kind of audience to ensure survival. However, given congress' hostility to PBS in the past not sure we have the mentality to make proper use of such a system.
Finally in this country we have a decent showing of biparisanship.....of course the congress is acting together in things none of us want--------My County tis of Thee.
Thought out was interesting the point made on NPR this morning. What exactly is the big deal about the use of biological/chemical attack? It's basically to say Assad can just keep killing all his citizens. As long as he only uses bullets we're fine with it.
As atrocious as it is, I'm just not in favor of intervening in this region of the world until the people of that region evolve even just a little. We take out one dictator, he'll just be replaced by someone else and often times worse than the original dictator.
Also sad that this conversation has mostly been about which idiot politician we each love the most. The only thing more worthless than politicians who can seemingly never accomplish anything is citizens arguing and divided over these idiots.
Thought out was interesting the point made on NPR this morning. What exactly is the big deal about the use of biological/chemical attack? It's basically to say Assad can just keep killing all his citizens. As long as he only uses bullets we're fine with it.
As atrocious as it is, I'm just not in favor of intervening in this region of the world until the people of that region evolve even just a little. We take out one dictator, he'll just be replaced by someone else and often times worse than the original dictator.
Also sad that this conversation has mostly been about which idiot politician we each love the most. The only thing more worthless than politicians who can seemingly never accomplish anything is citizens arguing and divided over these idiots.
Thought out was interesting the point made on NPR this morning. What exactly is the big deal about the use of biological/chemical attack? It's basically to say Assad can just keep killing all his citizens. As long as he only uses bullets we're fine with it.
As atrocious as it is, I'm just not in favor of intervening in this region of the world until the people of that region evolve even just a little. We take out one dictator, he'll just be replaced by someone else and often times worse than the original dictator.
Also sad that this conversation has mostly been about which idiot politician we each love the most. The only thing more worthless than politicians who can seemingly never accomplish anything is citizens arguing and divided over these idiots.
at the hearings I listened to they kept saying kids were killed. Lucky our missiless dont do that
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Comments
We seem to be caught in an infinite loop is the problem you miss. We remove troops from one country and place more there in an another country and all the while the cost of war only increases as people in THIS country go hungry for lack of assistance. I stand by my statements as I look towards the bigger picture. Think what you will and I'll do the same, but the facts speak for themselves. Failing restaurant..........That's funny.
:-)
One thing I have learned in over forty-seven years is simply this:
Wait and see.
Who knows what tomorrow will bring in politics? Certainly not I.
My point is that even if we remove every man deployed overseas today, something else will arise by the end of the year and here we go again.
Earnest said lawmakers who have seen the full assessment, such as Senate intelligence committee chairwoman Diane Feinstein and the panel's top Republican, Saxby Chambliss, have found it to be persuasive that the Assad government was behind the attack.
Taken from this article - http://www.chron.com/news/politics/article/US-making-case-for-action-against-Syria-4770120.php
So if Diane says it's okay I guess we should believe her, I mean she knows all about rights and law and all that stuff. Oh and aparently there's a lot of evidence out there, but we can't know the real meaty stuff. Give me a freaking break. They might as well have someone hold of a vile of white stuff and "we know where they are .... here, there, and around here" on a big board. This is pathetic.
Sad but unfortunately true.
1) Rebels Admit Mistake in Releasing Sarin Gas http://www.mintpressnews.com/witnesses-of-gas-atta...
2) UN Inspectors Suspect Sarin Was Released by Rebels http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syr...
The UN inspectors forced to leave Syria without completing inspections. Keep trying the links, they are real busy, but you will get through.
I think sometimes it's necessary to map out the logic of proposed solutions, as well as reviewing the history. The history? It's never worked to our advantage, yet we keep proposing the same actions. The Logic? Let's see, if dictator X uses "weapons of mass destruction", we're going to hit him from the sky with (wait for it)...............weapons of mass destruction! That's what missiles are, they do not discriminate, knocking door to door and asking "are you Bashir?". They (WE) just blow up, destroy and kill whatever gets in the way.
Real moral authority, isn't it?
.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Heads of State (Obama, PM,..) : WE MUST TAKE ACTION AGAINST SYRIA THIS CANNOT GO UNNOTICED. *5 minutes later* LETS CONSULT CONGRESS AND PARLIAMENT FIRST THOUGH AND SECRETLY HOPE THEY SAY NO.
Sorry for caps
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
True
As atrocious as it is, I'm just not in favor of intervening in this region of the world until the people of that region evolve even just a little. We take out one dictator, he'll just be replaced by someone else and often times worse than the original dictator.
Also sad that this conversation has mostly been about which idiot politician we each love the most. The only thing more worthless than politicians who can seemingly never accomplish anything is citizens arguing and divided over these idiots.
That is exactly why I say blame each for his own!
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain