How about we respond to the atrocities committed by the Syrian rebels, otherwise known as Al-Qaeda, to show the world just "who we are". After all, aren't we already at war with them?
The stark fact is that the U.S. is the only country in the world with the capacity to respond to Assad's outrageous use of chemical weapons in a way that might deter him from repeating it.
Well, that's just flat-out not true.
Turkey has an army. Saudi Arabia has an air force and a large bankroll. Just because they can't do it as well as the US doesn't mean they shouldn't do it themselves.
As has been said before, not one US Soldiers life is worth losing to save one of these damn animals, Let them gas each other who gives a [bleep]? If they start shooting gas outside their own borders then we can consider doing something if it affects the security of the US.
It's about time we quit messing in other peoples sand boxes, [bleep] wanna kill each other off, so be it, [bleep] wanna kill us off, then we got something to be upset about, as of now Syria is absolutely no threat to the US in anyway shape or form and I doubt they ever will be.
If we sit back long enough they might just press enough buttons and take care of the problem for us.
Paul
"I'd rather see a sermon than hear a sermon".... D.A.D.
Trump Won!, Sandmann Won!, Rittenhouse Won!, Suck it Liberal Fuuktards.
I just told you what I supported dumbshitt. I know you're a short order cook but I kept the answer short and succinct, for dumbasses just like yourself.
Do you need for me to draw you a illustration,too?
The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails. William Arthur Ward
By whom? Turkish security forces found a 2kg cylinder with sarin gas after searching the homes of Syrian militants from the Al-Qaeda linked Al-Nusra Front who were previously detained, Turkish media reports. The gas was reportedly going to be used in a bomb.
The sarin gas was found in the homes of suspected Syrian Islamists detained in the southern provinces of Adana and Mersia following a search by Turkish police on Wednesday, reports say. The gas was allegedly going to be used to carry out an attack in the southern Turkish city of Adana.
A government is the most dangerous threat to man�s rights: it holds a legal monopoly on the use of physical force against legally disarmed victims.
When the radical Muslims start respecting the Christians, the Jews, the Hindus the Sikhs the you name it, then they might be worth sharing the rest of the earth with. Until that time, let them fight it out between themselves. The more they kill between themselves the less we have to do it when WWIII really starts to get hot. kwg
For liberals and anarchists, power and control is opium, selling envy is the fastest and easiest way to get it. TRR. American conservative. Never trust a white liberal. Malcom X Current NRA member.
Syria and the Iraq Syndrome Responding to Assad is about more than our interests. It is 'about who we are. By WILLIAM A. GALSTON-
Only now is America reckoning the full cost of the disaster in Iraq�friends in the Middle East doubting our competence, our closest ally unwilling to stand with us in Syria, our people weary and fearful of entanglements that could prove open-ended. Little more than a decade after the Vietnam syndrome was laid to rest, an Iraq syndrome has replaced it.
The question is whether this new sentiment will dominate policy�whether acting for the wrong reasons in Iraq will prevent us from acting for the right reasons in Syria.
On Friday, in what was surely Secretary of State John Kerry's finest hour, he stated the challenge clearly to the nation: "Now, we know that after a decade of conflict, the American people are tired of war. Believe me, I am too. But fatigue does not absolve us of our responsibility."
"Our responsibility." What is it? What does it require of us? In the first place, "our" means all of us�the United States, not just the president. Whatever the truth of the interminable debate over the limits of executive power, Mr. Obama was right to ask the members of Congress, as representatives of the American people, to join him in a firm but measured response to Bashar Assad's crime against his own people.
But why is it this country's responsibility? The stark fact is that the U.S. is the only country in the world with the capacity to respond to Assad's outrageous use of chemical weapons in a way that might deter him from repeating it.
It would be good to have friends and allies standing with the U.S. But from a military standpoint, it is not strictly necessary. If America acts, others may follow�or at least offer support. If we don't, no one else will.
If you don't have the ability to do something, it makes no sense to say that you have a responsibility to do it. It does not follow that if you do have the ability to do something you also have the responsibility to do it. It does mean that you can't avoid the question.
For better or worse (mostly for better, I believe), the United States is the guarantor of the global order, which we took the lead in creating. In that role, we provide global public goods�forms of stability and security, such as freedom of the seas, from which other nations benefit, not just us.
True enough, the stability and security that this country provides allows other nations to be free-riders, to benefit from what we do without contributing to it. Understandably, the American people resent this�and when a foreign involvement backfires, they want to scale back the nation's global role.
But Americans benefit, perhaps more than anyone else, from the leading role the country plays in the world. The task of U.S. leaders is to remind the people that we have a lot to lose if others come to believe that we are no longer willing to bear the burdens of leadership.
These general truths do not resolve the particular question now before the country. Some things are clear. The president's aim in Syria is deterrence, not regime change. The means cannot include boots on the ground, and the actions taken must minimize the risk that any Americans will fall into Assad's hands.
A purely symbolic act would be worse than useless, however. Mr. Obama and Congress should weigh the possibility that effective deterrence may require targeting regime assets (such as Assad's air force) beyond those specifically involved in the poison-gas attack.
By seeking authorization for the use of military force, Mr. Obama has put the political system to a test. Has Congress lost the ability to treat serious matters seriously? Can the president persuade a reluctant people to follow him? He will not be able to do this unless he makes his case wholeheartedly, without reluctance or ambivalence.
Syria is about more than our interests, narrowly construed. What we do now is "profoundly about who we are," as Mr. Kerry put it. "We are the country that has tried, not always successfully, but always tried to honor a set of universal values around which we have organized our lives and our aspirations. This crime against conscience, this crime against humanity, this crime against the most fundamental principles of international community, against the norm of the international community�this matters to us, and it matters to who we are. And it matters to leadership and to our credibility in the world."
Mr. Obama will need to convey this idea to the American people as well, from the Oval Office. He must be prepared to go all-in to win what is shaping up as a tough fight on Capitol Hill. One thing is clear: A loss would shatter his presidency, and a lot more.
I never thought that I would see the day when isaac posted such an unmitigated crock of nonsense, apparently with his full support and agreement.
Our government is NOT honorable. On the contrary, our government's only interest is in perpetuating its power. Kerry is part of that government. Ergo, Kerry is not honorable and whatever he says is calculated to perpetuate the power of an idiotic, despotic and tyrannical government. Its not about us and who we are, its about those idiots in Washington and what they want us to believe. I'm not buying it.
and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God? (Micah 6:8)
If it's really about "who we are" where were we when the genocide was raging in Rwanda? Wasn't the USA/UN supposed to step in to stop any genocide after the horrific events in Europe during WW2? Or did we not act because there are no economic (oil price stability) benefits
My question is, where are the missiles aimed at? Who are we bombing? Even when we bombed the crap out of Germany in WW II, we still had to put boots on the ground. We destroyed Iraq from the air and still put boots on the ground. This will not end well.
I hope they wipe each other off the face of the planet...
Bob, my friend, you live in the world of reality, and I'm afraid that you may have taken a step out of it momentarily. Do you honestly believe that our mission there would be Operation Save The Babies?
It's nice to think about but come on bro.... never gonna happen...
If we go, it's for another reason entirely...
Obama wants PR...
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams
There are so many other avenues to go after Assad, assuming for the moment that he's the bad guy. Direct negotiation, the UN, International Court of Justice, financial sanctions, trade embargo/blockade.
However, as we have all seen, Obama approaches everything in a high handed, unilateralist, thug like manner backed by a campaign of lies and finger-pointing....with predictably sheitty results. Syria is just more of the same.
Obama is once again behaving irresponsibly and acting like a spoiled stupid child.
