How's that premature Nobel Peace Prize working out?
Syria loads chemical weapons into bombs; military awaits Assad's order - World News
Syria loads chemical weapons into bombs; military awaits Assad's order - World News
W.M.D.s loaded into Syrian bombs.
- Thread starter lonesomebob
- Start date
Not to worry, he's smarter and better educated than you and me......
No, no, I meant B.O., not craik! ;~)
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
A good plan would be to invade, put 100,000 American troops in syria, stay there for 10 years, spend a couple hundred billion doing it, lose 4-5,000 of them as KIAs and another 50k as WIA, and having a few hundred thousand civilians die as well.
That would rock!
That would rock!
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Do I detect a very slight amount of sarcasm? As far as I'm concerned let them wipe each other out, no need for the U.S. or it's allies to get involved.
I wonder who sold the weapons to Syria.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
Total and complete sarcasm Pete. We may disagree on a lot, but I think we are both sick of seeing Americans, Aussies, Brits and others die in the desert for no real reason. I suppose Bob would prefer more of that.
Syria has an old Soviet supplied military. Since then, I think the usual suspects have sold to them: India, China and France.
Syria has an old Soviet supplied military. Since then, I think the usual suspects have sold to them: India, China and France.
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Time to put a mark on the wall, I totally agree with that:thumbsup:
Put the mark on the wall for me too....
I fail to see, however, what O has done wrong in all of this other than make a threat that there would be a price to pay for that action. That threat might have a bit more weight had it come from the UN. Still - more men and women in the allied forces will likely die should their be a military engagement here and that troubles me deeply.
I fail to see, however, what O has done wrong in all of this other than make a threat that there would be a price to pay for that action. That threat might have a bit more weight had it come from the UN. Still - more men and women in the allied forces will likely die should their be a military engagement here and that troubles me deeply.
Can't speak for Bob but I think his comments were more on the irony of an unearned peace prize and the reality of lack of production by the illustrious Obama.
Even Abbas said he preferred working with Bush because he was engaged in the peace process whereas Obama has never been. That being said, the middle east is like quick sand for peace and no president has had much success.
Cannot see any benefit (or obligation) for military intervention so you can put my name up next to the repair job.:thumbsup:
Where's the Arab League!? Isn't this in their back yard? Don't we supply Egypt and Saudi Arabia with military equipment and lots of cash to keep the region stable? Why don't they take care of their own back yard? Oh, yeah, Egypt is in the midst of another dictator take-over and Saudi Arabia never wants to get their hands dirty.
Even Abbas said he preferred working with Bush because he was engaged in the peace process whereas Obama has never been. That being said, the middle east is like quick sand for peace and no president has had much success.
Cannot see any benefit (or obligation) for military intervention so you can put my name up next to the repair job.:thumbsup:
Where's the Arab League!? Isn't this in their back yard? Don't we supply Egypt and Saudi Arabia with military equipment and lots of cash to keep the region stable? Why don't they take care of their own back yard? Oh, yeah, Egypt is in the midst of another dictator take-over and Saudi Arabia never wants to get their hands dirty.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
Bob's a nutjob who thinks Obama is a socio-nazi-communist, that there are 80 members of the communist party in Congress, that Joe McCarthy was an American hero and that Obama stole the 2012 election (140% voter turnout in Port St. Lucie!).
His post above was exactly what you describe, and completely thoughtless in that in criticizing the President he was implicitly suggesting that another path -- armed troops on teh ground -- would be a better way to go.
The President's done a reasonable job in the Middle East. Out of Iraq. Out of Afghanistan. Libya and Tunisia on the way to at least semi-democracies with limited American involvement of loss of life. Egypt is a tougher nut to crack but I'm not sure anyone has a better idea of what to do there. If a country wants to democractically elect Islamic fundamentalists, what do you? Invade? Obama's continued to back the military there as the best check on the Muslim Brotherhood. Certainly not a perfect solution but I don't see a reasonable alternative at this point.
His post above was exactly what you describe, and completely thoughtless in that in criticizing the President he was implicitly suggesting that another path -- armed troops on teh ground -- would be a better way to go.
The President's done a reasonable job in the Middle East. Out of Iraq. Out of Afghanistan. Libya and Tunisia on the way to at least semi-democracies with limited American involvement of loss of life. Egypt is a tougher nut to crack but I'm not sure anyone has a better idea of what to do there. If a country wants to democractically elect Islamic fundamentalists, what do you? Invade? Obama's continued to back the military there as the best check on the Muslim Brotherhood. Certainly not a perfect solution but I don't see a reasonable alternative at this point.
Pat
Supporter
Jeff, had a status of forces agreement been made with Iraq, we would have been able to maintain a minimal presence there to inhibit the arms flow from Iran to Hamas and the Assad regime. Mr. Obama thoroughly botched it forcing the Iraqis to tolerate Iranian adventures to protect themselves. The "Arab Spring" Mr. Obama supported in Egypt has replaced a dictator that nominally supported U.S. interests with another dictator that is now facing a popular uprising in opposition to his imposition of Sharia Law. We also have four dead Americans in Libya, a successfully muted media response (imagine if it had been a Republican) and the perpetrators gleefully conducting Al Jazeera interviews with impunity. Add that to the unrestricted arms flow to Hamas, the chaos in Syria bleeding off in to Turkey, I would not regard that as “ a reasonable job in the Middle East”.
Sarin is very, very nasty stuff and if it is used on Syrian civilians, it will be nothing short of mass murder on a horrific scale. (It is also a particularly unpleasant way to die.) I suspect Mr. Obama will not risk conflict with Mr. Putin or the Iranians and our “serious consequences” will be little more than U.N. chest thumping and threats of a no fly zone. But then the media said Mr. Obama did as best he could for the economy before the election so by that standard, perhaps you’re right.
Sarin is very, very nasty stuff and if it is used on Syrian civilians, it will be nothing short of mass murder on a horrific scale. (It is also a particularly unpleasant way to die.) I suspect Mr. Obama will not risk conflict with Mr. Putin or the Iranians and our “serious consequences” will be little more than U.N. chest thumping and threats of a no fly zone. But then the media said Mr. Obama did as best he could for the economy before the election so by that standard, perhaps you’re right.
Isn't this a wonderful new world we live in, where liberals now think and post your opinions for you?
Four years ago, the sea levels began to go down, the earth began to heal, and the world fell back in love with the U.S. because of B.O.
What has B.O.'s bowing and scraping gotten us? How much more will we give? How many more "Arab Springs" will he endorse?
I've stated many times here that we should wage what I would call "Warm War I" in which we flood the world with cheap oil, cutting off our enemy's cash flow and ushering in a new wave of world wide prosperity. Not a single bullet would need to be fired. Unfortunately, prosperity is not on the liberal agenda, so of course, it will never happen as this world has veered heavily to the left where government is our only hope of prosperity.
As for young's casualty list, it is large and it is grievous, but it is a drop in the bucket compared to the hundreds of millions of innocent souls, mainly black and brown, who have been terminated before they were even born by the incessant leftist propaganda that has made abortion an unquestionable right. We won't even bother with how many born souls have lost their lives to Communism.
Before Jung speaks my mind for me again, let it be known that I am not interested in banning abortion, because I believe if my enemy wants to kill off their own, who am I to stop them. BUT the arrogant posturing of how many less casualties there would be if we didn't wage war (regardless of the necessity) is quite frankly ludicrous in comparison to the war on the unborn.
Four years ago, the sea levels began to go down, the earth began to heal, and the world fell back in love with the U.S. because of B.O.
What has B.O.'s bowing and scraping gotten us? How much more will we give? How many more "Arab Springs" will he endorse?
I've stated many times here that we should wage what I would call "Warm War I" in which we flood the world with cheap oil, cutting off our enemy's cash flow and ushering in a new wave of world wide prosperity. Not a single bullet would need to be fired. Unfortunately, prosperity is not on the liberal agenda, so of course, it will never happen as this world has veered heavily to the left where government is our only hope of prosperity.
As for young's casualty list, it is large and it is grievous, but it is a drop in the bucket compared to the hundreds of millions of innocent souls, mainly black and brown, who have been terminated before they were even born by the incessant leftist propaganda that has made abortion an unquestionable right. We won't even bother with how many born souls have lost their lives to Communism.
Before Jung speaks my mind for me again, let it be known that I am not interested in banning abortion, because I believe if my enemy wants to kill off their own, who am I to stop them. BUT the arrogant posturing of how many less casualties there would be if we didn't wage war (regardless of the necessity) is quite frankly ludicrous in comparison to the war on the unborn.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
Check it out. Nutjob qua nutjob. He managed to tie Obamahate with an anti-abortion rant (with a racist tinge even!) with the rightwing fantasy that we have an unlimited supply of oil (we have 2% of the world's known reserve) with some commie references thrown in on the side. You make my case better than I ever could.
jeff, I endorse abortion, we have 300 years of oil at current usage. Do you deny the millions of people the communists have killed?
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
That's a pretty standard Faux News view of the world. Let's turn back to reality.
1. Libya and Tunisia are actually mostly successes. Low loss of American life (4), no American soliders on teh ground and reasonable Islamic democracies.
2. In Eqypt, the Egyptians elected the Muslim Brotherhood. Are you saying we should overthrow their democractially elected regime? Is that your position? I don't think what Obama has done there is any different than any other President would have done. Our only option is to continue to fund the military as a counterbalance to the Brotherhood.
3. Iraq? Keep troops there? No. And 10,000 troops would have stopped nothing. A clean break was needed, and we got it.
In 4 years, we've wound down one war, are strating to wind down another, have repaired our relationships with our allies in Europe, and managed the Arab spring. Qualified success for the President on that front.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
And we still have 2% of the world's known reserves. Meaning we can't "flood the market with cheap oil."
I don't deny that communists have killed millions, capitalists have killed millions, socialists have killed millions, Christians have killed millions, Jews have killed millioins, Genghis Khan killed milions, Europeans in the New World killed millions and so on. So I fail to see your point.
Plus, you reneged on your Port St. Lucie bet. Where is the "I am a dumbass" thread you were supposed to post?
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Jeff,
You left out that he also thinks the Founding Fathers ended slavery, that Iraq attacked us on 9-11, that Fox is a "news" channel, that Democrats are Socialists, Fascists, Natzies, Communists, and that Allen West is the leader of the "True" Conservatives..................oh, wait, he's right on that one!
Last edited:
