Jump to content

Syria: Does Use of Chemical Weapons Change Anything?


Syria: Does Use of Chemical Weapons Change Anything?  

79 members have voted

  1. 1. How Should the US Respond to Mass Murder with Chemical Weapons

    • Direct Military Intervention? (Such as boots on the ground or airstrikes)
      1
    • Indirect Military Intervention? (Training and Equiping Rebels; Tomahawk Strikes)
      3
    • No Intervention? (Let 'em sort it out on their own)
      75


Recommended Posts

  • Moderators
Posted

I thought I read somewhere that Congress alone controls our aggressive entrance into wars. I must have been mistaken.

Didn't stop George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan...
Posted

I thought I read somewhere that Congress alone controls our aggressive entrance into wars. I must have been mistaken.

 

Well, they are necessary to declare war.  Otherwise, they can only make a special effort to pull purse strings.

 

- OS

Posted (edited)

Why do I believe the Russians are much more qualified to run things than Obama and his band of retards?

 

"The West handles the Islamic world the way a monkey handles a grenade," Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin tweeted

 

 

BTW... Did he call Obama a monkey? Racist sumbitch, ain't he?

Edited by mikegideon
  • Like 1
Guest ThePunisher
Posted (edited)

Why do I believe the Russians are much more qualified to run things than Obama and his band of retards?

"The West handles the Islamic world the way a monkey handles a grenade," Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin tweeted


BTW... Did he call Obama a monkey? Racist sumbitch, ain't he?

Yeah, the Russians are also homophobes? Edited by ThePunisher
Posted (edited)

Didn't stop George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan...

 

I believe Dubya did have Congress' support/approval for what he did, as stupid and costly as it was is (in regards to Iraq).

Edited by Garufa
Posted

I believe Dubya did have Congress' support/approval for what he did, as stupid and costly as it was is (in regards to Iraq).

 

Bush didn't have the same level of ego. Our current Clown-in-Chief needs to start wearing a wide brimmed, crushed velvet hat.

  • Like 1
Posted

Bush didn't have the same level of ego. Our current Clown-in-Chief needs to start wearing a wide brimmed, crushed velvet hat.

 

Perhaps something along the lines of

 

Pimp_Obama.png

  • Like 4
Guest ThePunisher
Posted
He's been pimping out the Presidency for the last 5 years.
Guest nra37922
Posted

I've always said I could see him as a 70's era pimp. 

Posted

Perhaps something along the lines of

 

Pimp_Obama.png

Just needs some boots with goldfish swimming in the heels............Maybe he can borrow Michelle's

Guest ThePunisher
Posted (edited)

Just needs some boots with goldfish swimming in the heels............Maybe he can borrow Michelle's


How about a 70's Afro hairstyle like his communist idol Angela Davis use to wear. Edited by ThePunisher
Guest 6.8 AR
Posted

This isn't about saving one damned life. Pure politics. He needs a big distraction from all his domestic problems to

continue his domestic agenda. Hell, even the Republicans want an action to start over there! No win situations seem

to be an excuse to get politicians to schedule votes to moderate their vote tabulation to appear they have done something.

Obamacare, immigration and the scandals will only be replaced by this in the news, and the usual bunch called the

American public will have forgotten everything else while we set up the stage for WWIII.

 

There are only a handful of them I like, and they aren't in Tennessee, so I can't vote for them. Washington DC needs to be

purged.

Posted

This isn't about saving one damned life. Pure politics. He needs a big distraction from all his domestic problems to

continue his domestic agenda.

 

I agree that this administration has a history of throwing out shiny objects in order to distract from their own woes.  One of the more recent examples was the White House and DOJ stirring the pot after the Zimmerman verdict.

 

But I think this one is way more two dimensional, and shows what a screw up Obama and his advisors are.  What's going on now goes back to when he made his "red line" comments.  It was a vague and arbitrary comment to throw out because he was told the polls suggested he needed to look tough or something.  He responds by throwing out idle threats and making them seem not idle.  He had no intentions of backing it up no matter how bad things got, which is why he made the threat so vague.  Then Syria (as far as we know) uses chemical weapons.  At this point folks are left to assume this has crossed a serious red line; a nation's leader gassing his own people.  If Obama does nothing now he looks impotent and the word of the US has lost credibility.  If Obama does do something he looks like a warmonger because he's involving himself in a fight we have no place being involved.

 

So what is the obvious political solution?  He is stuck between two crappy courses of action.  The answer: split the political difference.  He will launch a bunch of tomahawks at non-strategic military targets within Syria, which will make a bunch of noise and allow him to save face after he ran his mouth.  He won't commit any troops or manned air assets as to avoid getting into a shooting war.  Assad will continue doing what he does.

Guest nra37922
Posted

But the masses still get their free Obama phones.......

Posted

But the masses still get their free Obama phones.......

Can I have a free Obama-Glock? When is that program rolling out? Or maybe I can buy some of all that ammo they've been buying?
Guest 6.8 AR
Posted

I agree that this administration has a history of throwing out shiny objects in order to distract from their own woes. One of the more recent examples was the White House and DOJ stirring the pot after the Zimmerman verdict.

But I think this one is way more two dimensional, and shows what a screw up Obama and his advisors are. What's going on now goes back to when he made his "red line" comments. It was a vague and arbitrary comment to throw out because he was told the polls suggested he needed to look tough or something. He responds by throwing out idle threats and making them seem not idle. He had no intentions of backing it up no matter how bad things got, which is why he made the threat so vague. Then Syria (as far as we know) uses chemical weapons. At this point folks are left to assume this has crossed a serious red line; a nation's leader gassing his own people. If Obama does nothing now he looks impotent and the word of the US has lost credibility. If Obama does do something he looks like a warmonger because he's involving himself in a fight we have no place being involved.

So what is the obvious political solution? He is stuck between two crappy courses of action. The answer: split the political difference. He will launch a bunch of tomahawks at non-strategic military targets within Syria, which will make a bunch of noise and allow him to save face after he ran his mouth. He won't commit any troops or manned air assets as to avoid getting into a shooting war. Assad will continue doing what he does.

That's certainly possible with him and it has it's share of precedent.
Shallow is what comes from him and mis-spoken phrases do get
thrown out. The end result of this"red line" could be WWIII, though.
I wonder if he knows that? I think he does now, anyway, because
someone has to have said something to him by now.

Thats something he doesn't care about, though,because, whether
or not he realized it, it fits with his desire to hurt this country. Good
people will die over his bad statement.

Either way is a possibility. I just take him more literally, which
points to me how evil he is.
Posted

That's certainly possible with him and it has it's share of precedent.
Shallow is what comes from him and mis-spoken phrases do get
thrown out. The end result of this"red line" could be WWIII, though.
I wonder if he knows that? I think he does now, anyway, because
someone has to have said something to him by now.

Thats something he doesn't care about, though,because, whether
or not he realized it, it fits with his desire to hurt this country. Good
people will die over his bad statement.

Either way is a possibility. I just take him more literally, which
points to me how evil he is.

 

What's funny is that his motive is one of the two, but both are equally evil in their purpose as they are designed to advance him politically, but do nothing for the sake of our country.

Posted

So what is the obvious political solution?  He is stuck between two crappy courses of action.  The answer: split the political difference.  He will launch a bunch of tomahawks at non-strategic military targets within Syria, which will make a bunch of noise and allow him to save face after he ran his mouth.  He won't commit any troops or manned air assets as to avoid getting into a shooting war.  Assad will continue doing what he does.

 

He should stall and let the investigators do their jobs. In a couple of months, there will be a new shiny anyway.

  • Moderators
Posted (edited)
I'm gonna dip into fantasyland on this one but wouldn't it be nice if O called a press conference and said something along the lines of "Upon a closer examination of the situation is Syria we have no national interest in either side winning. Both sides suck and on top of that, the American people want absolutely no part of this Charlie Foxtrot. Taking all that into account we have decided that, Syria, this is your mess, you figure it out. I'm late for golf." Edited by Chucktshoes
  • Like 1
Guest 6.8 AR
Posted
Putin may bitch slap Obama in a way we don't need. Syria
may as well be an ally of Russia. I don't see anything but
Obama making more of a fool of himself and dragging us
into a war that no one needs. The enemy is wishing us to
get into this foray, unlike the American public.
Guest 6.8 AR
Posted
And I sure wish Corker would keep his damned mouth
shut. He's all in favor of taking shots at Syrians, along
with several others. It's strange when I agree with Dennis
Kucinich.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

TRADING POST NOTICE

Before engaging in any transaction of goods or services on TGO, all parties involved must know and follow the local, state and Federal laws regarding those transactions.

TGO makes no claims, guarantees or assurances regarding any such transactions.

THE FINE PRINT

Tennessee Gun Owners (TNGunOwners.com) is the premier Community and Discussion Forum for gun owners, firearm enthusiasts, sportsmen and Second Amendment proponents in the state of Tennessee and surrounding region.

TNGunOwners.com (TGO) is a presentation of Enthusiast Productions. The TGO state flag logo and the TGO tri-hole "icon" logo are trademarks of Tennessee Gun Owners. The TGO logos and all content presented on this site may not be reproduced in any form without express written permission. The opinions expressed on TGO are those of their authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the site's owners or staff.

TNGunOwners.com (TGO) is not a lobbying organization and has no affiliation with any lobbying organizations.  Beware of scammers using the Tennessee Gun Owners name, purporting to be Pro-2A lobbying organizations!

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to the following.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines
 
We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.