Quote:

---

Originally posted by Brenda:
Is this guy for real?

---

Quote:

---

Of course, no beating of the war drums could be complete without a little fearmongering and McCain delivered: “As you know, a flood of weapons is coming in from Russia and Iran. Iranians are on the ground in Syria.”

---

Quote:

---

I hope he means the BUSH administration because they’re the ones that stated unequivocally that we knew that Iraqi WMDs existed and where they were. They’re also the ones that said, “Oops, we were wrong.” Ten years later and John McCain, still eager to whitewash the disaster of the Iraq War, will not admit that it was all based on a lie.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Brenda:
Is this guy for real?

---

He's not the problem. They are. Yes, some are just that crazy. We helped in Serbia. we helped in Libya, but we're not gonna help these Muslims?

Quote:

---

Of course, no beating of the war drums could be complete without a little fearmongering and McCain delivered: “As you know, a flood of weapons is coming in from Russia and Iran. Iranians are on the ground in Syria.”

---

Is it 'fear mongering' if it's true ? Yes or No, please.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
So, taking out a village or a few blocks, is crossing the 'red line'. But just a couple of 'small area' bursts, like breaking up an angry crowd... that's kosher ?


Got it.

---

Quote:

---

http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/01/opinion/miller-obama-syria-no-win/index.
html?hpt=hp_t3

The fact is, Obama has no good options. He'll pick the least worst one, providing some kind of weapons to the rebels. That will make us feel better, neutralize the liberal interventionists and conservative Republicans who've been blasting him and respond to those who say he's backing away from his red line.

It won't turn the tide in Syria or necessarily prevent al-Assad from using chemical weapons. The other alternatives -- do nothing or design a proactive and comprehensive military strategy to take out the al-Assads -- aren't in the cards.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

*IF* it's true. Big "IF".

And yes, it can still be fear mongering even if it's true.

---

Quote:

---

A fertilizer plant in West, Texas has killed more people with chemical weapons than the Syrian military has. Where's the outrage there? Where's the massive manhunt for the criminal mastermind who was CEO of the plant?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
A nuanced and thorough examination of the situation and the options. Rap and the knee-jerkers won't like it because it's not John Wayne simplistically talking about kicking Assad's ass or bombing them all back to the stone age

---

Quote:

---

How many dollars and lives do they want Obama to spend to remove this bozo? Well, of course that's a rhetorical question-- they don't REALLY care what it costs, especially not in lives or the blood of America's not-rich, or if it succeeds or not, they just want to be able to hang the price tag around Obama's neck, and on any other Democrat.

---

Quote:

---

U.S. policy on Syria still lacks coherence

By Editorial Board, Published: May 1

THE MUDDLE that is President Obama’s policy on Syria has grown still muddier. On Tuesday the president backed away from a “red line” he had drawn on the use of chemical weapons by the regime of Bashar al-Assad, setting the threshold for proof of a violation in such a way as to virtually exclude the possibility that one could ever be confirmed. Yet that same day his aides leaked to The Post and other news organizations the news that the president might soon reverse his long-standing opposition to providing Syrian rebels with arms. And the administration readied yet another effort to persuade Russia to abandon its support of the Assad regime in favor of a negotiated political transition.

Can any coherence be found in this? A charitable interpretation might be that Mr. Obama wishes to avoid immediate U.S. intervention but wants to pressure Moscow into changing its position by letting it be known that the alternative is greater U.S. support for the rebels. If so, Mr. Obama is being too clever. His weak and legalistic words about the need to verify a “chain of custody” on any chemical-weapons use and his declaration that even a hard confirmation would lead only to a “rethink [of] the range of options” simply invite further chemical attacks.

... But if Mr. Obama continues to pursue a policy of awaiting U.N. consensus and deferring to Russia, the result will be more crossings of his red line — and grave damage to U.S. interests.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/us-policy-on-syria-still-lacks-
coherence/2013/05/01/dbda6cfc-b27b-11e2-bbf2-a6f9e9d79e19_story.html

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:


You're an idiot. By YOUR pea brained thinking, the CEO's of auto companies should all be on death row. Annually, 10's of thousands die by traveling in cars. Where's the outrage ???

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
So, taking out a village or a few blocks, is crossing the 'red line'. But just a couple of 'small area' bursts, like breaking up an angry crowd... that's kosher ?


Got it.

---

What would you say if Assad's military were using AR-15s with high-capacity magazines to kill people?


Chemical weapons don't kill people, after all - people kill people. And the problem isn't chemical weapons at all.

Right?

Isn't that your - and the NRA's - stance?



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

---

Quote:

---

Why would Obama even consider this?

Because he blundered badly. Foolishly, he put his credibility on the line by warning that any Syrian use of chemical weapons would cross a "red line" and be a "game changer" with "enormous consequences."

Not only was this ultimatum unwise, Obama had no authority to issue it. If Syria does not threaten or attack us, Obama would need congressional authorization before he could constitutionally engage in acts of war against Syria. When did he ever receive such authorization?

Moreover, there is no proof Syrian President Bashar Assad ever ordered the use of chemical weapons.

U.S. intelligence agencies maintain that small amounts of the deadly toxin sarin gas were likely used. But if it did happen, we do not know who ordered it.

Syrians officials deny that they ever used chemicals.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AgentRouka:
The whole situation is deeply distressing. A civil war and a proxy war for numerous other countries who each support their own faction for their own reasons. Russia and Iran support Assad. Western nations and Saudi Arabia support the opposition. Islamist extremists benefit. No one can just waltz in without careful considerations of every other outsider's reaction.

How can anything good ever come of this?

Meanwhile you have 1.4 million refugees and many more internally displaced in need of support. 70.000 killed. World heritage sites damaged or destroyed.

You want to do something, but what can you really do that might not make things worse? Well, I guess everyone with fingers in the pie could spontaneously decide to work together to minimize all that civilian suffering but it hasn't happened so far, so...

I'm having a cynical Thursday morning.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN:
John McCain To Attack Vladimir Putin With Column In Pravda
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/13/john-mccain-column-pravda_n_3
922619.html?ir=Politics
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is responding to Russian President Vladimir Putin's op-ed in the New York Times with a column of his own.
McCain will attack Putin in a column in the Russian newspaper Pravda, according to The Cable.

---