senate oks limited response

senate oks limited response (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Lucylastic -> senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 12:51:41 PM)
Senate committee authorizes limited military response in Syria By Kasie Hunt and Erin McClam, NBC News The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday voted to give President Barack Obama the power to a launch a military attack to punish Syria for using chemical weapons. The vote was 10-7. It marked the first time in more than a decade — since a 2002 resolution that preceded the Iraq war — that members of Congress have voted to authorized military action. The resolution, which could be voted on by the full Senate as early as next week, forbids Obama from using ground troops in Syria and allows the military response to last no longer than three months. The yes votes comprised seven Democrats and three Republicans, including Sen. John McCain, who had expressed reservations that the United States was not doing enough to arm the rebels fighting Syrian leader Bashar Assad. http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/03/20306844-senate-committee-authorizes-limited-military-response-in-syria?lite Bloody hell:(

mnottertail -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 12:54:45 PM)
Well the leadership on that committee is not the full senate, and a long ways from the house.

Lucylastic -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 12:57:36 PM)
I know but stilll bloody hell

DesideriScuri -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 1:03:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic I know but stilll bloody hell It is looking like it's going to be a bloody hell, no doubt. Damn.

Yachtie -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 1:23:31 PM)
FR- There is an opportunity here for both the Senate and the House. Vote no across the board and see if Obama will honor that, being supposedly the democratic will of the People of Rome.

mnottertail -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 1:25:32 PM)
Rome New York has never been our capital. Rather, we should jail the house as Lincoln did in Maryland and see if the nutsuckers are doing the will of the people.

mnottertail -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 1:27:19 PM)
You would think at least a few of the more intelligent nutsuckers are thinking this through, and going yeah, but we want to go into North Korea and Iran and we want to call that imminent, like we have for the last 10 years.

Lucylastic -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 1:31:37 PM)
Maybe they realise their posting history is for all to see

mnottertail -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 1:35:24 PM)
No, they will never attain that level of awareness, nor of continuity.

Lucylastic -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 1:37:18 PM)
well you did say the intelligent ones,wink

JeffBC -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 2:16:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Bloody hell:( I think that about sums it up. One might also think of Obama, then, as a "bloody murderer", right?

mnottertail -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 2:23:06 PM)
That is why our flag is red white and blue. Even quakers killed.

Lucylastic -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 2:32:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Bloody hell:( I think that about sums it up. One might also think of Obama, then, as a "bloody murderer", right? yepppp. depending on your reason for using bloody murderer... its surprising how many "leaders" arent And no, Im not trying to distract from the shit going on now

DomKen -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 3:30:46 PM)
My fellow liberals, why are you arguing that we should let a vicious despot continue using poison gas on his own people? I understand the tea party types who reflexively oppose the President on anything but when did we lose our way? I understand wanting confirmation before hand but to simply oppose the very idea of keeping this guy from violating a nearly century old norm I cannot understand. Do we really want to live in a nation where this stuff is commonly used?

JeffBC -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 3:41:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic yepppp. depending on your reason for using bloody murderer... its surprising how many "leaders" arent For me the world became a lot more sensible once I realized they are not our appointed representatives to govern on our behalf. They are tyrants playing "game of thrones". Suddenly I no longer needed to wonder at all the idiocy that goes on because it isn't idiocy... it makes total sense. I just assumed some sort of reasonably decent intent which was unwarranted.

RottenJohnny -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 4:04:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Do we really want to live in a nation where this stuff is commonly used? Would you please clarify what you mean by this statement? It sounds as though you're suggesting this happens in the US.

MasterCaneman -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 4:14:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen My fellow liberals, why are you arguing that we should let a vicious despot continue using poison gas on his own people? I understand the tea party types who reflexively oppose the President on anything but when did we lose our way? I understand wanting confirmation before hand but to simply oppose the very idea of keeping this guy from violating a nearly century old norm I cannot understand. Do we really want to live in a nation where this stuff is commonly used? First, I am no liberal. And I agree the use of chemical weapons is wrong no matter what. The real question is, why is it that we have to fix this problem? Why don't Syria's neighbors step in, seeing as they're going to be dealing with it up close in one way or another? A Senate committee agreed, not the entire Congress. It's just another red herring to sidestep the mistakes Obama's made in his foreign policy. He knows that they will probably not vote yes, he's just covering his ass with smoke and mirrors. Let the UN or the Arab League fix this. Hell, make the Russians. They're the ones who sold the shit to Syria in the first place. They of all people would know how to deal with it. Putin wants Russia to be a superpower again, here's his chance on a silver platter. They actually have skin in the game, with a warm-water port at stake. Let them blood their troops for a change, ours have all the experience we'll need for at least another decade. The world didn't care that much when Mussolini did it to the Ethiopians or when Hussein gassed the Kurds. The rest of the world seems to be too busy with other things, but, oh by the way, they'll send a strongly worded rebuke. They want us to fix it? Fine. For a fee. Which we'll determine when payment's due. Until or unless that happens, we should stay the hell out of there. Let them kill each other off, I've lost all caring for that part of the world by now. I'm sick of all the propaganda being shoveled at me. If those were American kids, oh yeah, I'd be hell for leather to turn that place into a greasy scorch mark on the desert floor, but they're not. Call it cold, but I can't muster up any feeling for helping people who ultimately want to destroy me. Both sides are technically our enemy, why should we preserve one side over the other?

DesideriScuri -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 4:16:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen My fellow liberals, why are you arguing that we should let a vicious despot continue using poison gas on his own people? I understand the tea party types who reflexively oppose the President on anything but when did we lose our way? I understand wanting confirmation before hand but to simply oppose the very idea of keeping this guy from violating a nearly century old norm I cannot understand. Do we really want to live in a nation where this stuff is commonly used? How imperialistic of you. Where does our Constitution say we have the authority to enter a sovereign country when we don't like what they are doing?

RottenJohnny -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 4:26:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman Let the UN or the Arab League fix this. Hell, make the Russians. They're the ones who sold the shit to Syria in the first place. They of all people would know how to deal with it. Putin wants Russia to be a superpower again, here's his chance on a silver platter. They actually have skin in the game, with a warm-water port at stake. Let them blood their troops for a change, ours have all the experience we'll need for at least another decade. MC, you've just highlighted the absolute best argument (and strategy) for the President to avoid going in...turn the heat up on the Russians.

Yachtie -> RE: senate oks limited response (9/4/2013 4:27:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen My fellow liberals, why are you arguing that we should let a vicious despot continue using poison gas on his own people? I understand the tea party types who reflexively oppose the President on anything but when did we lose our way? I understand wanting confirmation before hand but to simply oppose the very idea of keeping this guy from violating a nearly century old norm I cannot understand. The world should ask of the US, "Who made you King?" We should ask of ourselves, "Do we want to be King?" That's how we've been acting for a long time now. You say it's a century old norm that's being violated. Chemical weapons are obscene. So are mortar rounds, tanks, and troops used on civilian populations. Modern warfare itself is obscene. Assad was killing his own people for quite some time prior to chemical use. But that was not enough to move your fellow liberals. You're a weak King, DomKen, since it's King you apparently wish to be. Where were you prior to chemical use?

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.859375E-02