Breaking: US and Britain pledge to use force within two weeks in Syria.

[longhornfan1234]

[QUOTE=gigantes]how much of that, beyond basic taxes, will you be sending to the govt to pay for what could turn into yet another extremely costly conflict?

let me guess-- you

[gigantes]

I'm against acting at all... but Obama made his stance and now can't backtrack. He boxed himself into a corner. It's a tough subject because using chemical weapons against your own people is pretty horrific but the dynamics of the Syria conflict has vast ranges .

what? you're against acting at all, so now you want us to jump in all gung ho? what?

you are like a lot of conservatives, am i right? two modes-- normal relations or all-out war. zero to sixty. when that's decided, it's bush junior style, right? just go ahead and 'appeal' to congress by making them look bad, then completely ignore the objections of the UN and partner nations and just jump in there, throw other peoples' lives around, and saddle the govt with huge debt. am i wrong?

i do agree with you that chemical weapons are horrific, and i don't know the syria situation per se (you got me there), but i will always be about considering the full range of options and choosing the most pragmatic one. that's just the way we roll around here.

if you're taking any pleasure in the president looking like a jackass, you're playing a fool's game IMO. the president's very job is to look like a jackass and try to make the best decisions possible.

all you folks who go after him for nothing reasons or who went after clinton for his hanky panky... i just think you all have a really weird idea of what the job of POTUS is. like you want a priest-king or something.

giddyup.

[niko]

what? you're against acting at all, so now you want us to jump in all gung ho? what?

you are like a lot of conservatives, am i right? two modes-- normal relations or all-out war. zero to sixty. when that's decided, it's bush junior style, right? just go ahead and 'appeal' to congress by making them look bad, then completely ignore the objections of the UN and partner nations and just jump in there, throw other peoples' lives around, and saddle the govt with huge debt. am i wrong?

i do agree with you that chemical weapons are horrific, and i don't know the syria situation per se (you got me there), but i will always be about considering the full range of options and choosing the most pragmatic one. that's just the way we roll around here.

if you're taking any pleasure in the president looking like a jackass, you're playing a fool's game IMO. the president's very job is to look like a jackass and try to make the best decisions possible.

all you folks who go after him for nothing reasons or who went after clinton for his hanky panky... i just think you all have a really weird idea of what the job of POTUS is. like you want a priest-king or something.

giddyup.

The stupidest thought to me is "now we have to do something". So basically, you put yourself in a situation where the wrong choice seems logical, then follow through with the wrong choice, because that's what you are expected to do.

That's bizarre to me. If you paint yourself into a corner step on the paint and go clean your feet and have more space to move.

[Nick Young]

what? you're against acting at all, so now you want us to jump in all gung ho? what?

you are like a lot of conservatives, am i right? two modes-- normal relations or all-out war. zero to sixty. when that's decided, it's bush junior style, right? just go ahead and 'appeal' to congress by making them look bad, then completely ignore the objections of the UN and partner nations and just jump in there, throw other peoples' lives around, and saddle the govt with huge debt. am i wrong?

i do agree with you that chemical weapons are horrific, and i don't know the syria situation per se (you got me there), but i will always be about considering the full range of options and choosing the most pragmatic one. that's just the way we roll around here.

if you're taking any pleasure in the president looking like a jackass, you're playing a fool's game IMO. the president's very job is to look like a jackass and try to make the best decisions possible.

all you folks who go after him for nothing reasons or who went after clinton for his hanky panky... i just think you all have a really weird idea of what the job of POTUS is. like you want a priest-king or something.

giddyup.

Obama is actually a better example of over the top warfare then George W. Bush.

Obama sent more troops to their death then George W. has and spent more money on the military in 6 years then George W. did in 8, yes, that is adjusted for inflation.


And I am someone who thought George W. was a horrible president and a war-mongerer.

It amazes me to no end how Obama is able to fool everyone in to thinking he's a pacifist.

All they have to do is look at the statistics.

Obama has had American citizens assassinated with robot drones without giving them fair trial. Why is everyone giving him a free pass for all of the horrible things he has done?


He has continued Bush's warmongering legacy and grown it exponentially.

[nightprowler10]

He has continued Bush's warmongering legacy and grown it exponentially.

Sad but true.

http://drones.pitchinteractive.com/

[zoom17]

This is not going to end well hope theres no ww3

[zoom17]

Why is the us so opposed of taking Iran down what have they done to us?

[Nick Young]

Why is the us so opposed of taking Iran down what have they done to us?

[gigantes]

Obama is actually a better example of over the top warfare then George W. Bush.

Obama sent more troops to their death then George W. has and spent more money on the military in 6 years then George W. did in 8, yes, that is adjusted for inflation.


And I am someone who thought George W. was a horrible president and a war-mongerer.

It amazes me to no end how Obama is able to fool everyone in to thinking he's a pacifist.

All they have to do is look at the statistics.

Obama has had American citizens assassinated with robot drones without giving them fair trial. Why is everyone giving him a free pass for all of the horrible things he has done?


He has continued Bush's warmongering legacy and grown it exponentially.

interesting take. i'd like to see what one of our known political watchers has to say in response.

couple things pop in to my mind-- obammers inherited the current wars, so that has to play in to the equation. also, drone strikes killing people are not the same thing as coalition troops needlessly dying. the difference is that the innocent victims are the civilians caught in the vicinity of the terrorist strikes as opposed to our innocent young people sent off to war. and the cost of drone strikes would be far less than standard military operations, i would guess.

also, AFAIK obama has acted far more in line with the UN and partner nations than bush ever did. to call him a bigger warmonger than bush seems pretty far out.

no, obama was not my choice for prez, but i'm not going to lump him with junior just yet.

[OldSkoolball#52]

It goes way beyond the presidents. The United States has always propped up dictators and funded the revolt against others. Not only in the Middle East, but all over Latin American among places around the globe. And this goes back decades to the beginning of the 20th Century.

Didnt hear a lot of "Its not just the president's decision" when Bush was in office.


When Bush was in office, every casualty, every contract, every stubbed toe was "BUSHS FAULT BUSHS FAULT. We need HOPECHANGE!!! HOPECHANGE FROM OBAMA HE'LL MAKE EVERYTHING DIFFERENT!!!!"

And now..... crickets

And I wasnt even a Bush guy. Im moderate, but for god sakes the hypocrisy on the left is unbearable.

[gigantes]

The stupidest thought to me is "now we have to do something". So basically, you put yourself in a situation where the wrong choice seems logical, then follow through with the wrong choice, because that's what you are expected to do.

That's bizarre to me. If you paint yourself into a corner step on the paint and go clean your feet and have more space to move.

that's what made the bush junior presidency so surreal to me.

so many times they would make these huge glaring mistakes and when called out on such, would usually act very defiant and self-righteous... then whole sections of the country applauded them for it. cowboy-religio logic.

like reverse evolution or something.

[Take Your Lumps]

It's a tough subject because using chemical weapons against your own people is pretty horrific but the dynamics of the Syria conflict has vast ranges .

I wonder why we didn't have a problem supplying Saddam with said weapons.

[OldSkoolball#52]

It amazes me to no end how Obama is able to fool everyone in to thinking he's a pacifist

Its bc these people dont support policies (they dont understand policy) they support politicians. They hate X, they love Y. Theyll tell you they hate what X is doing, but then when Y goes in and does it, they have a million justifications. Little puppets on a string.

[Nick Young]

interesting take. i'd like to see what one of our known political watchers has to say in response.

couple things pop in to my mind-- obammers inherited the current wars, so that has to play in to the equation. also, drone strikes killing people are not the same thing as coalition troops needlessly dying. the difference is that the innocent victims are the civilians caught in the vicinity of the terrorist strikes as opposed to our innocent young people sent off to war. and the cost of drone strikes would be far less than standard military operations, i would guess.

also, AFAIK obama has acted far more in line with the UN and partner nations than bush ever did. to call him a bigger warmonger than bush seems pretty far out.

no, obama was not my choice for prez, but i'm not going to lump him with junior just yet.

Obama inherited the wars and promised to end them during his elections. Instead he has spent more money in 6 years then W. Bush did in 8 (adjusted for inflation) on the military and sent more troops to Iraq and Afghanistan then George W. Bush did.

He also has started assassinating American citizens and innocent civilians with robot assassin drones.

Obama speaks like he wants peace, but if you look at his actions he is hungrier for war then George W. Bush.


The cost of drone strikes is not the problem! I would be in favor of sending robot airplanes instead of American citizens to war if it was actually effective.

IT'S HOW HE USES THE DRONES. HE KILLS THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS AND HAS TARGETED AMERICAN CITIZENS FOR ASSASSINATION WITHOUT GIVING THEM FAIR TRIAL, WHICH DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS THE CONSTITUTION.

You can claim it is not only Obama making these decisions, and excuse him for the deaths, he is the one with the final say. Obama is directly responsible for those killed by drone strike under his command. How are these drone strikes murdering innocent civilians any different from Al Quaeda murdering all those innocent civilians on September 11?

[Nick Young]

that's what made the bush junior presidency so surreal to me.

so many times they would make these huge glaring mistakes and when called out on such, would usually act very defiant and self-righteous... then whole sections of the country applauded them for it. cowboy-religio logic.

like reverse evolution or something.

And now it is in reverse, the liberals are applauding Obama's concerted war effort, and drone strikes murdering US citizens, the cowboy-religios are frowning at it.

Republicans and Democrats are not very different and ultimately want the exact same things. Hopefully people will realize this soon