Suggesting Obama may have made a mistake = Amoral.
No, not caring that people are gassed = amoral.
The "why should we care" atttitude you have = amoral.
Oh I see, Caring = Bombing.
Thanks for the moral guidance!
Keep sticking your head in the sand, Mr. "Not my problem".
Keep bombing your way out of the world's problems, Mr. "Compassionate" - it works everytime!
I partly agree with you. It didn't work for US in all these wars after 1945. But it did work during World War II, and we in Europe still thank you for that.
In many ways the situation now is comparable to that period. The Iranian leader Khamenei and his vassal Assad are the Middle Eastern equivalent of Hitler and Mussolini. The FSA and the jihadists could be somewhat compared to the Soviet Union. For example, even the jihadists hate Iran and Assad a thousands times more than the Israelis.
This not just about saving lives, but also about saving America's reputation in the Middle East.
This guy makes interesting posts because his understanding of the world is so far removed from mine.
The Soviet Union saved Europe from Hitler.
Is he saying that the jihadists will save the middle east.
Could be, who knows?
Yeah, I said the secular brigades of the FSA plus the jihadists could be somewhat compared to the Soviet Union who saved Europe from the Nazis. Only a very small fraction of the rebels are actually Al Qaeda affiliated.
Some have also compared the Syrian Civil War with the Spanish Civil War.
The least we can do is to send weapons or allow Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia to send weapons to the Syrian opposition.
9/10/13 A Syrian???s Cryfor Help
NYTimes.com
www.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/opinion/a-syrians-cry-for-help.html 1/3
THE story is simple. Here in Syria, there is a regime that has been killing its
subjects with impunity for the last 30 months. The notion that there is a mysterious
civil war that is inextricably linked to the nature of the Middle East and its
complicated sectarian divisions is far from the truth.
The primary perpetrator of violence is the government of Bashar al-Assad,
which controls public resources, the media, the army and the intelligence services.
The civilians who rose up against that regime, first peacefully and then through
armed resistance, constitute a broad spectrum of Syrian society.
When a government murders its own citizens and they resist, this can hardly be
called a civil war. It is a barbaric campaign of the first degree.
During the revolution???s first year, Syrians demanded international protection.
First we asked for no-flight zones or humanitarian corridors, and later for weapons
and military aid for the Free Syrian Army, but to no avail.
Not a month went by without some American or NATO official expressing little
appetite for intervention. Realizing that this attitude was not about to change, the
regime escalated the violence. It attacked the rebels with everything it had: first
with rifles, then with tanks, helicopters, jet fighters, missiles and toxic gases.
Meanwhile, Western powers masked their diplomatic inertia with empty
rhetoric about a ???political solution.??? Yet they have failed to coax the regime ???
which has not once indicated that it is ready to abandon its ???military solution??? ??? to
the negotiating table.
Inaction has been catastrophic. While the world has dithered, Syrians have
experienced unprecedented violence. Around 5,000 Syrians were killed in 2011.
About the same number are now being killed each month. The regime has targeted
lines outside bakeries; it has used Russian cruise missiles to bomb densely
populated areas; and local activists say they have documented 31 occasions when it
has used chemical weapons (United States officials have confirmed only some of
these attacks).
Countless Syrians, among them women and children, have been subjected to
arbitrary detention, rape and torture. A staggering seven million people ??? onethird of Syria???s population ??? are now displaced, either internally or externally.
These violations have all been documented by international organizations,
including Human Rights Watch and the United Nations Human Rights Council.
These organizations have repeatedly attempted to refer the Syria file to the
International Criminal Court, but Russian and Chinese barriers have stood in their
way.
Russia and China have used their veto privilege on three occasions, blocking
Security Council resolutions condemning the regime???s war crimes and crimes
against humanity. Russia continues to provide arms and diplomatic cover to a
regime that is becoming more dangerous by the day.
In the West, reservations about supporting the Syrian rebels that once seemed
callous and immoral are now considered justified because of the specter of
jihadism. But this view is myopic.
Jihadist groups emerged roughly 10 months after the revolution started. Today,
these groups are a burden on the revolution and the country, but not on the regime.
On the contrary, their presence has enabled the regime to preserve its local base,
and served to bolster its cause among international audiences.
It is misguided to presume that Mr. Assad???s downfall would mean a jihadist
triumph, but unfortunately this is the basis for the West???s position. A more
accurate interpretation is that if Mr. Assad survives, then jihadism is sure to thrive.
What Syria needs is a legitimate government that is strong enough to
delegitimize militias, to disarm and integrate them, and to enforce adequate
policies to confront them. The Assad government does not have popular legitimacy.
Only its demise can signal the beginning of the end of nihilist jihadism, and thus
the beginning of Syria???s recovery.
Justice and humanity demand that the Assad regime be punished for its crimes.
Even though the Russians and the Chinese have managed to impair the Security
Council, it is still possible for an international and regional coalition to carry out
this task.
A half-hearted intervention will not be enough. The United States and those
who join it must not simply ???discipline??? the regime for its use of chemical weapons
alone, without making a decisive impact on events in Syria. To do so would be a
waste of effort and send the wrong message.
We Syrians are human beings of this world, and the world must stop the Assad
regime from killing us. Now.
In this post he has said that it is ok for the US to use chemical weapons against her own people as long as it is for crowd control.
In other posts he has said:
there is no right to privacy. (re: NSA)
there is no freedom of religion (his reasoning was religion is a choice) (re:Romney)
And on and on.
Here he is saying that the way to handle a bad situation is with limited bombing.
His reasoning is that chemical weapons are immoral, thus bombing is the only answer.
But is Assad the worse dictator in the world? (Top 5 for sure.)
Is the use of chemical weapons the greatest humanitarian problem in the world?
I also doubt that he is a lawyer, since his legal opinions consistently are wrong.
.
Pepper spray is not a chemical weapon under the CWC, as used by police, This is a fact.
Cite to where I said there is no right to privacy. If you're referring to business records not being private, The US Supreme Court said that, not me. This is fact.
Cite to where I said that there is no freedom of religion. Thanks.
I'm not the only that thinks limited bombing should be done, I also support the Russian proposal, and said so in this thread, You leave that out because it destroys your false meme, and you're dishonest.
Cite to where I said bombing is the only answer. See above.
Cite three legal opinons I gave that were wrong. One could be a mistake, two a coincidence. But since I'm "consistently" wrong, three should be easy for you to find.
Looks like just about everyone here is criticizing you.....you make that easy to be good at.
Never admitting that the current administration has/can make a mistake has nothing to do with the Constitution.
5-6 people out of how may members is far from "just about everyone". It's also just the usual know-nothings doing the criticizing, whose opinion is meaningless to me. You've been living in Texas too long.
Questioning my integrity is BS, and you know it.
It's also hogwash that I've never criticized this administration. You're 2/2 on the BS scale.
Looks like just about everyone here is criticizing you.....you make that easy to be good at.
Never admitting that the current administration has/can make a mistake has nothing to do with the Constitution.
5-6 people out of how may members is far from "just about everyone". It's also just the usual know-nothings doing the criticizing, whose opinion is meaningless to me. You've been living in Texas too long.
Questioning my integrity is BS, and you know it.
It's also hogwash that I've never criticized this administration. You're 2/2 on the BS scale.
Awesome.
All the members that don't post are not criticizing you...every single friggin' one of them.
Some people have argued this and I think I might be moving towards their positions. Basically the Obama administration has wanted to stay out of any major involvement in Syria from day one. The threat of a strike for WMD use, may be just a ruse to deter Syria from using any chemical weapons again in the future. The fact that Obama didn't launch an immediate attack, has gone to the Congress, and now is caught up with the Russian offer for Syria to turn over and destroy all its WMD all points to the White House not being in a rush to push the trigger any time soon. Just a thought.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
motown67 said:
Some people have argued this and I think I might be moving towards their positions. Basically the Obama administration has wanted to stay out of any major involvement in Syria from day one. The threat of a strike for WMD use, may be just a ruse to deter Syria from using any chemical weapons again in the future. The fact that Obama didn't launch an immediate attack, has gone to the Congress, and now is caught up with the Russian offer for Syria to turn over and destroy all its WMD all points to the White House not being in a rush to push the trigger any time soon. Just a thought.
Fuck that. Obama illegally supported terrorists to overthrow Assad, same dudes and weapons he was illegally backing in Libya. And he didn't go to Congress to get approval for the bombing he so badly wants to begin in Syria. He's been forced into it with his approval rating hitting all time lows, knowing that it's more sensitive a subject than he anticipated for him to continue acting like a Caesar Hawk. Plus, we all know that if it wasn't his own Al Qaeda agents who did all of the chemical bombing in Syria, that whoever did it including Assad, bought those very chemical weapons from the US under Obama's "watch". Seriously, dude is done and just needs to quietly ride off into the sunset of losers. No need to keep playing apologist for him. It only makes you look bad.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Yes, it's tin foil hat until it goes into the history books 5 years down the road. The US has been doing this shit for centuries and it's all well documented. But just go ahead and keep letting that in-the-moment emotional propaganda drive your every milk dud opinion.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Oh no, known asshole thinks it's dorky to be on the right side of history. What ever shall we unfashionable doves do?
harv et al: why are you even responding to that loser or his minion? it simply provides them with an opportunity to spout their venom and bile and to continue to drive away long-time members of this community.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
crabmongerfunk said:
harv et al: why are you even responding to that loser or his minion?
Started out responding to motown. But of course twin bots think they own any slice of political discussion on this board. So leave it to one of them (actually I think there is actually only one of them) to jump in. My bad for feeding the troll.
regardless of whether this was by design or clumsily lucking out...The President ended up accomplishing 2 things...he forced Republicans vote AGAINST military action, betraying their MIC mealticket, and got self-proclaimed "patriots" to put the balls of an ex-KGB agent in their mouths.
harv et al: why are you even responding to that loser or his minion?
Started out responding to motown. But of course twin bots think they own any slice of political discussion on this board. So leave it to one of them (actually I think there is actually only one of them) to jump in. My bad for feeding the troll.
While I don't believe LMJ and BV are one in the same it is quite amazing how identical their schtick is.
The only thing I know they have in common is that they both have law degrees.
And of course they are both loved by the majority of the members here, especially those who don't post.
Yes, it's tin foil hat until it goes into the history books 5 years down the road. The US has been doing this shit for centuries and it's all well documented. But just go ahead and keep letting that in-the-moment emotional propaganda drive your every milk dud opinion.
Don't give yourself so much credit. You know you don't care about history or the facts. All you care about is America is bad, everything is America's fault. In your world, the U.S. government is all powerful and can illegally bomb Libya and blow up a factory in Texas, but then suddenly can't bomb Syria. And remember, the Syrian war started 2 years ago and during the summer there was a report of chemical weapons used by the regime but it wasn't proven, so why has it taken so long for the U.S. to talk about bombing? And why aren't they bombing Syria right now then? It's because Obama is unpopular? You gotta step up your game.
And of course they are both loved by the majority of the members here, especially those who don't post.
What a weird thing to say, Rock.
What's even more amazing is your schtick; being wrong in these political theads.
Romney winning? Wrong.
Rick Perry winning? Wrong.
Crimes committed in the so-called "IRS Scandal"? Wrong,
How impeachment works? Wrong.
I agree with everything Obama has done? Wrong.
Obama attacking Syria without Congressional approval? Wrong.
The list goes on and on and on.
I will say that it's always amusing to see the usual know-nothings get their panties in a bunch, every single time, in these political threads. It's like clockwork. They get a little push back on their ideas, and they lose their minds. A flaw is pointed out in their reasoning? They lose their minds. It's too funny.
I'll be back in here when I need a good laugh at the know-nothings' expense. And, for the record, I don't consider everyone that doesn't agree with me, or whom I don't agree with, to be included in that group.
Toodles!
b/w
I'm glad that Obama is pursuing a diplomatic resolution on this, but I'm not naive enough to think it was possible without the sabre rattling.
harv et al: why are you even responding to that loser or his minion? it simply provides them with an opportunity to spout their venom and bile and to continue to drive away long-time members of this community.
ob??ses??sion
/??b??seSH??n
noun
noun: obsession.
the state of being obsessed with someone or something.
Get help, man.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
motown67 said:
HarveyCanal said:
Yes, it's tin foil hat until it goes into the history books 5 years down the road. The US has been doing this shit for centuries and it's all well documented. But just go ahead and keep letting that in-the-moment emotional propaganda drive your every milk dud opinion.
Don't give yourself so much credit. You know you don't care about history or the facts. All you care about is America is bad, everything is America's fault. In your world, the U.S. government is all powerful and can illegally bomb Libya and blow up a factory in Texas, but then suddenly can't bomb Syria. And remember, the Syrian war started 2 years ago and during the summer there was a report of chemical weapons used by the regime but it wasn't proven, so why has it taken so long for the U.S. to talk about bombing? And why aren't they bombing Syria right now then? It's because Obama is unpopular? You gotta step up your game.
Right, when America takes a dump in 500 of their neighbors' backyards in succession, I err on the side of them taking yet another dump. Not sure why I'm supposed to suddenly believe their blatant propaganda at this point in time.
And the US government being outright evil has nothing to do with me calling them evil. Their actions speak for themselves.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Some people have argued this and I think I might be moving towards their positions. Basically the Obama administration has wanted to stay out of any major involvement in Syria from day one. The threat of a strike for WMD use, may be just a ruse to deter Syria from using any chemical weapons again in the future. The fact that Obama didn't launch an immediate attack, has gone to the Congress, and now is caught up with the Russian offer for Syria to turn over and destroy all its WMD all points to the White House not being in a rush to push the trigger any time soon. Just a thought.
Fuck that. Obama illegally supported terrorists to overthrow Assad, same dudes and weapons he was illegally backing in Libya. And he didn't go to Congress to get approval for the bombing he so badly wants to begin in Syria. He's been forced into it with his approval rating hitting all time lows, knowing that it's more sensitive a subject than he anticipated for him to continue acting like a Caesar Hawk. Plus, we all know that if it wasn't his own Al Qaeda agents who did all of the chemical bombing in Syria, that whoever did it including Assad, bought those very chemical weapons from the US under Obama's "watch". Seriously, dude is done and just needs to quietly ride off into the sunset of losers. No need to keep playing apologist for him. It only makes you look bad.
why in the fuck to people think Obama wants to bomb Syria? What in his history as president supports this theory? He went to congress, knowing they'd reject authorization, so that he could throw up his hands and say it isn't his fault (while secretly sighing in relief that congress didn't call his bluff). He doesn't want to bomb anyone. He's a pussy.
Comments
Yeah, I said the secular brigades of the FSA plus the jihadists could be somewhat compared to the Soviet Union who saved Europe from the Nazis. Only a very small fraction of the rebels are actually Al Qaeda affiliated.
Some have also compared the Syrian Civil War with the Spanish Civil War.
The least we can do is to send weapons or allow Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia to send weapons to the Syrian opposition.
NYTimes.com
www.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/opinion/a-syrians-cry-for-help.html 1/3
THE story is simple. Here in Syria, there is a regime that has been killing its
subjects with impunity for the last 30 months. The notion that there is a mysterious
civil war that is inextricably linked to the nature of the Middle East and its
complicated sectarian divisions is far from the truth.
The primary perpetrator of violence is the government of Bashar al-Assad,
which controls public resources, the media, the army and the intelligence services.
The civilians who rose up against that regime, first peacefully and then through
armed resistance, constitute a broad spectrum of Syrian society.
When a government murders its own citizens and they resist, this can hardly be
called a civil war. It is a barbaric campaign of the first degree.
During the revolution???s first year, Syrians demanded international protection.
First we asked for no-flight zones or humanitarian corridors, and later for weapons
and military aid for the Free Syrian Army, but to no avail.
Not a month went by without some American or NATO official expressing little
appetite for intervention. Realizing that this attitude was not about to change, the
regime escalated the violence. It attacked the rebels with everything it had: first
with rifles, then with tanks, helicopters, jet fighters, missiles and toxic gases.
Meanwhile, Western powers masked their diplomatic inertia with empty
rhetoric about a ???political solution.??? Yet they have failed to coax the regime ???
which has not once indicated that it is ready to abandon its ???military solution??? ??? to
the negotiating table.
Inaction has been catastrophic. While the world has dithered, Syrians have
experienced unprecedented violence. Around 5,000 Syrians were killed in 2011.
About the same number are now being killed each month. The regime has targeted
lines outside bakeries; it has used Russian cruise missiles to bomb densely
populated areas; and local activists say they have documented 31 occasions when it
has used chemical weapons (United States officials have confirmed only some of
these attacks).
Countless Syrians, among them women and children, have been subjected to
arbitrary detention, rape and torture. A staggering seven million people ??? onethird of Syria???s population ??? are now displaced, either internally or externally.
These violations have all been documented by international organizations,
including Human Rights Watch and the United Nations Human Rights Council.
These organizations have repeatedly attempted to refer the Syria file to the
International Criminal Court, but Russian and Chinese barriers have stood in their
way.
Russia and China have used their veto privilege on three occasions, blocking
Security Council resolutions condemning the regime???s war crimes and crimes
against humanity. Russia continues to provide arms and diplomatic cover to a
regime that is becoming more dangerous by the day.
In the West, reservations about supporting the Syrian rebels that once seemed
callous and immoral are now considered justified because of the specter of
jihadism. But this view is myopic.
Jihadist groups emerged roughly 10 months after the revolution started. Today,
these groups are a burden on the revolution and the country, but not on the regime.
On the contrary, their presence has enabled the regime to preserve its local base,
and served to bolster its cause among international audiences.
It is misguided to presume that Mr. Assad???s downfall would mean a jihadist
triumph, but unfortunately this is the basis for the West???s position. A more
accurate interpretation is that if Mr. Assad survives, then jihadism is sure to thrive.
What Syria needs is a legitimate government that is strong enough to
delegitimize militias, to disarm and integrate them, and to enforce adequate
policies to confront them. The Assad government does not have popular legitimacy.
Only its demise can signal the beginning of the end of nihilist jihadism, and thus
the beginning of Syria???s recovery.
Justice and humanity demand that the Assad regime be punished for its crimes.
Even though the Russians and the Chinese have managed to impair the Security
Council, it is still possible for an international and regional coalition to carry out
this task.
A half-hearted intervention will not be enough. The United States and those
who join it must not simply ???discipline??? the regime for its use of chemical weapons
alone, without making a decisive impact on events in Syria. To do so would be a
waste of effort and send the wrong message.
We Syrians are human beings of this world, and the world must stop the Assad
regime from killing us. Now.
this dude and his sidekick are really undermining this entire community.
Why?
Pepper spray is not a chemical weapon under the CWC, as used by police, This is a fact.
Cite to where I said there is no right to privacy. If you're referring to business records not being private, The US Supreme Court said that, not me. This is fact.
Cite to where I said that there is no freedom of religion. Thanks.
I'm not the only that thinks limited bombing should be done, I also support the Russian proposal, and said so in this thread, You leave that out because it destroys your false meme, and you're dishonest.
Cite to where I said bombing is the only answer. See above.
Cite three legal opinons I gave that were wrong. One could be a mistake, two a coincidence. But since I'm "consistently" wrong, three should be easy for you to find.
Also, LOL @ me" lying about living Spokane".
Thanks!
Get off my dick, troll.
The only time I converse with you, is when you post this BS.
Buzz off.
nice try though
5-6 people out of how may members is far from "just about everyone". It's also just the usual know-nothings doing the criticizing, whose opinion is meaningless to me. You've been living in Texas too long.
Questioning my integrity is BS, and you know it.
It's also hogwash that I've never criticized this administration. You're 2/2 on the BS scale.
Awesome.
YMD
Rather than WMD, btw
Now: stop posting, please.
LOL! @ lost the argument. Was there an argument competition going on?
You're one of the know-nothings I am referring to.
Put me on ignore, or buzz off, dude.
All the members that don't post are not criticizing you...every single friggin' one of them.
b/w
You're a pompous ass....that is a fact.
Fuck that. Obama illegally supported terrorists to overthrow Assad, same dudes and weapons he was illegally backing in Libya. And he didn't go to Congress to get approval for the bombing he so badly wants to begin in Syria. He's been forced into it with his approval rating hitting all time lows, knowing that it's more sensitive a subject than he anticipated for him to continue acting like a Caesar Hawk. Plus, we all know that if it wasn't his own Al Qaeda agents who did all of the chemical bombing in Syria, that whoever did it including Assad, bought those very chemical weapons from the US under Obama's "watch". Seriously, dude is done and just needs to quietly ride off into the sunset of losers. No need to keep playing apologist for him. It only makes you look bad.
Started out responding to motown. But of course twin bots think they own any slice of political discussion on this board. So leave it to one of them (actually I think there is actually only one of them) to jump in. My bad for feeding the troll.
While I don't believe LMJ and BV are one in the same it is quite amazing how identical their schtick is.
The only thing I know they have in common is that they both have law degrees.
And of course they are both loved by the majority of the members here, especially those who don't post.
Just know "I could care less".......have a semantic field day......your opinions are meaningless to me.
Don't give yourself so much credit. You know you don't care about history or the facts. All you care about is America is bad, everything is America's fault. In your world, the U.S. government is all powerful and can illegally bomb Libya and blow up a factory in Texas, but then suddenly can't bomb Syria. And remember, the Syrian war started 2 years ago and during the summer there was a report of chemical weapons used by the regime but it wasn't proven, so why has it taken so long for the U.S. to talk about bombing? And why aren't they bombing Syria right now then? It's because Obama is unpopular? You gotta step up your game.
What a weird thing to say, Rock.
What's even more amazing is your schtick; being wrong in these political theads.
Romney winning? Wrong.
Rick Perry winning? Wrong.
Crimes committed in the so-called "IRS Scandal"? Wrong,
How impeachment works? Wrong.
I agree with everything Obama has done? Wrong.
Obama attacking Syria without Congressional approval? Wrong.
The list goes on and on and on.
I will say that it's always amusing to see the usual know-nothings get their panties in a bunch, every single time, in these political threads. It's like clockwork. They get a little push back on their ideas, and they lose their minds. A flaw is pointed out in their reasoning? They lose their minds. It's too funny.
I'll be back in here when I need a good laugh at the know-nothings' expense. And, for the record, I don't consider everyone that doesn't agree with me, or whom I don't agree with, to be included in that group.
Toodles!
b/w
I'm glad that Obama is pursuing a diplomatic resolution on this, but I'm not naive enough to think it was possible without the sabre rattling.
ob??ses??sion
/??b??seSH??n
noun
noun: obsession.
the state of being obsessed with someone or something.
Get help, man.
Right, when America takes a dump in 500 of their neighbors' backyards in succession, I err on the side of them taking yet another dump. Not sure why I'm supposed to suddenly believe their blatant propaganda at this point in time.
And the US government being outright evil has nothing to do with me calling them evil. Their actions speak for themselves.
why in the fuck to people think Obama wants to bomb Syria? What in his history as president supports this theory? He went to congress, knowing they'd reject authorization, so that he could throw up his hands and say it isn't his fault (while secretly sighing in relief that congress didn't call his bluff). He doesn't want to bomb anyone. He's a pussy.