Right-Wingers: What's different about Syria?

[Synthaholic]

Synthaholic, I will try and answer your question rationally with what I believe and what is my humble opinion. Let me say that I do NOT support the position that Barry and his cronies have pushed for in Syria and I believe that the differences between Iraq and Syria are stark indeed.

You're not off to a good start.

What is this wingnut obsession with calling him Barry? What is wrong with a nickname when you have a difficult name to pronounce or remember? I don't remember anybody ever giving Condoleezza Rice shit for being called Condi.

It's just more seething hate that the Right has had for this president since before he took office.

Regardless of what you on the left want to say now, everyone from President Clinton, the Senator from New York Hillary Clinton, and many, many others had said that Hussien had violated the 91 treaty over and over again and posed a clear and present danger. Clinton had launched cruise missles into Iraq and had tasked the US Air Force in enforcing the 'no fly zone' over Iraq. A number of Iraqi anti-aircraft batteries had been attacked and destroyed by our planes for 'painting' them with fire control radar. President Clinton had done everything BUT invade and I suppored President Clintons actions.

The very pilots who flew those missions told me that they flew too high to be shot down by the Iraqis, when I was at Incirlik Air Base in Türkiye. And yes, we did destroy the ones who tried anyway.

They were no more effective than the Palestinian kids are, who throw rocks at Israeli tanks and fall short by a few hundred feet.

The intelligence from the time of Clinton and Bush (pre-invasion) was clear, and President Clinton had referenced this intelligence in national speeches. He was doing everything in his power to reconstitute his WMD's and we already KNEW that he would use them if given the chance. The British, the French, the Israeli's, and everyone else said they were convinced of his attempts to reconstitute those weapons. He had already attacked the Kurds in 91 and 92 with VX nerve gas (as verified by the UN). Intel estimates from the Clinton era gave him VX, mustard and ricin. Additionally, there was NO civil war in Iraq, although attempts had been made (possibly the reason for the Kurds being gassed).

false and false.

The United Nations Security Council had passed a number of resolutions regarding Iraq and the last resolution gave authority to 'force' Hussien to comply with the terms of his surrender in 91. The United States Congress had voted to give President Bush authority to do what was necessary in Iraq.

Would you like to count the number of resolutions that Israel has ignored over the decades?

That's different, somehow.

The USS Cole was attacked and Hussien gave money to the families of the terrorists who did the attack. The families of the terrorists who attacked American embassies in Africa were also given money by Hussien.

So? He wanted to look like a big man.

And tell me, just because the man of the family wants to be an asshole Jihadist, why should his 4 year old girl, or his wife's 80 year old mother, suffer poverty in the street for his actions?

Right-Wing pettiness is truly ugly.

He did everything in his power to undermine and attack our national interests in not only the middle east but other nations around the world. Hussien had given speech after speech advising that he was going to attack US interests across the region and exact revenge for the 91 war.

So what? We undermine the interests of nations we dislike every day.


Holy shit - there's still another half of your post left!

I'm taking a break. Correcting wingnuttery is tiring.

 

[Borillar]

It's amazing how wingnuts don't see a regime that has used poison gas even further west than Iraq is as not a threat to Israel.

Oops! Forgot! Democratic President!

1. I'm a Democrat, and I'm opposed to military intervention in Syria just like I was against military intervention in Iraq.
2. Israel is fully capable of defending itself against Syria.

Did you argue in 2003 that we needed to go into Iraq to protect Israel? I doubt it.

But wingnuts did.

No, I was against the Iraqi invasion. The way the reasons kept changing from day to day to justify it stunk to high heaven. I thought then as I do now, that Israel can take care of itself.

 

[Borillar]

Is Kuwait US soil?

So what "interests " are you referring to?

.

Oil is our economic lifeblood. The free flow of oil from the Mideast is in our national interest. If Kuwait didn't have any oil, do you think we would have gotten involved beyond a stern denunciation in the UN?

So IF oil is so important to our economic well being why are we supporting a Jewish state in the middle of a gazillion Muslims?

Why are we using falsehoods to invade middle eastern oil producing countries?!?!?!?!?!?!?


.

Good questions. IMHO, our support for Israel is mostly cultural and religious. Christians want to support the "Holy Land".

We (the USA) use falsehoods to invade middle eastern oil producing countries in order to install governments favorable to us - puppets if you will.

 

[Google]

What is the difference in rationale between Iraq and Syria?

• Dictator/Tyrant has WMD capability
• Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here
• Danger to Israel
• De-stabilize ME

Right-Wing refusal to back strikes proves that Iraq really was only about controlling the oil.

So is Syria about oil as well?

 

[Google]

Synthaholic, you do remember the endless names Bush was called by the left? Hell, there was a book depicting his murder, dolls hanged in effigy--not to get too far off topic, but to sit there and say calling Obama Barry is over the line, or that Obama has faced unprecedented hatred and disrespect is disingenuous and simply incorrect.

 

[Wyld Kard]

What is the difference in rationale between Iraq and Syria?

• Dictator/Tyrant has WMD capability
• Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here
• Danger to Israel
• De-stabilize ME

Right-Wing refusal to back strikes proves that Iraq really was only about controlling the oil.

Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here

Really? So if America does not launch a military strike on Syria, you believe that Assad will have his forces attack America and we will be fighting them here in America.

Is that your crazy assumption or can you back it up with something? I'm going to guess that it's your crazy assumption.

Because this sounds like liberal/democratic/progressive fear tactic bullshit, to scare people into getting behind Obama and supporting him against Syria.

 

[squeeze berry]

If Obama is no different than Bush, why aren't conservatives supporting him the way they supported Bush?

because conservative are smarter than libtards( who are a partisan brainwashed crowd) and learn from previous mistakes?

And where do I find the thread where all the conservative Iraq war supporters around here admit that Iraq was a mistake and admit they were wrong to support it?

In fact, they can post that here, now.

We'll be able to tell by how many make that admission whether or not you're full of shit.

what does one war have to do with another?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Synthaholic, you do remember the endless names Bush was called by the left? Hell, there was a book depicting his murder, dolls hanged in effigy--not to get too far off topic, but to sit there and say calling Obama Barry is over the line, or that Obama has faced unprecedented hatred and disrespect is disingenuous and simply incorrect.

because conservative are smarter than libtards( who are a partisan brainwashed crowd) and learn from previous mistakes?

And where do I find the thread where all the conservative Iraq war supporters around here admit that Iraq was a mistake and admit they were wrong to support it?

In fact, they can post that here, now.

We'll be able to tell by how many make that admission whether or not you're full of shit.

what does one war have to do with another?

Not a thing.

The left wants us to admit that the only reason we are against going into Syria is that we hate Obama. They refuse to see any argument other than that... Unless you want to count the ones who want to throw the race card....

Once again, the world believed that Saddam was hiding WMD because he wanted Iran to believe he had them....

In Syria going against Assad is the same as fighting for AQ.......

But they refuse to understand these things....

 

[asterism]

With Iraq, conservatives couldn’t wait to go to war, in support of a republican president. Conservatives accused those opposed to invading Iraq as being ‘un-American,’ ‘weak on terror,’ ‘terrorist sympathizers,’ and ‘anti-troop.’

Now, all of a sudden, with a democrat in the WH, conservatives are ‘opposed to “war.”’

The fact is conservatives oppose a military strike against Syria solely for partisan reasons, only because Obama support a strike, having nothing to do with the merits and facts of such a military action.

With Syria, conservatives are exhibiting the epitome of partisan hypocrisy.

Or maybe invading and defeating Saddam and then routing Al Qaeda was removing two threats while attacking Assad is supporting Al Qaeda.

Now the liberals supporting this war? Well that's just comical and down right sad.

False.

Harry Reid is calling you out.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=PcjRFudQLck#t=190]Harry Reid Likens Assad to Hitler, Says 'Hottest Place in Hell' Reserved for Those Who Stay Neutral - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Synthaholic]

Or maybe invading and defeating Saddam and then routing Al Qaeda was removing two threats while attacking Assad is supporting Al Qaeda.

Now the liberals supporting this war? Well that's just comical and down right sad.

False.

Harry Reid is calling you out.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=PcjRFudQLck#t=190]Harry Reid Likens Assad to Hitler, Says 'Hottest Place in Hell' Reserved for Those Who Stay Neutral - YouTube[/ame]

Saying that Liberals support this 'war' is false.

But whatcha gonna do?

 

[Synthaholic]

What is the difference in rationale between Iraq and Syria?

• Dictator/Tyrant has WMD capability
• Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here
• Danger to Israel
• De-stabilize ME

Right-Wing refusal to back strikes proves that Iraq really was only about controlling the oil.

So is Syria about oil as well?

No, Syria is about WMDs.

ACTUAL WMDs that REALLY EXIST!

 

[dilloduck]

False.

Harry Reid is calling you out.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=PcjRFudQLck#t=190]Harry Reid Likens Assad to Hitler, Says 'Hottest Place in Hell' Reserved for Those Who Stay Neutral - YouTube[/ame]

Saying that Liberals support this 'war' is false.

But whatcha gonna do?

Kerry isn't a liberal ?

 

[Synthaholic]

Synthaholic, you do remember the endless names Bush was called by the left? Hell, there was a book depicting his murder, dolls hanged in effigy--not to get too far off topic, but to sit there and say calling Obama Barry is over the line, or that Obama has faced unprecedented hatred and disrespect is disingenuous and simply incorrect.

Reading comprehension is obviously not your strong suit.

I never claimed it was over the line. I said it was stupid to try to use it disparagingly because it's no different than calling Condaleeza Rice Condi.

 

[Synthaholic]

What is the difference in rationale between Iraq and Syria?

• Dictator/Tyrant has WMD capability
• Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here
• Danger to Israel
• De-stabilize ME

Right-Wing refusal to back strikes proves that Iraq really was only about controlling the oil.

Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here

Really? So if America does not launch a military strike on Syria, you believe that Assad will have his forces attack America and we will be fighting them here in America.

Is that your crazy assumption or can you back it up with something? I'm going to guess that it's your crazy assumption.

Because this sounds like liberal/democratic/progressive fear tactic bullshit, to scare people into getting behind Obama and supporting him against Syria.

First, that was Bush's argument, and you dutifully nodded your approval.

Are you only now realizing that you were a fool?


Second, it would be very easy for Assad to give CW to terrorists who could smuggle it into the U.S. a hell of a lot easier than a nuke.

 

[Synthaholic]

Synthaholic, you do remember the endless names Bush was called by the left? Hell, there was a book depicting his murder, dolls hanged in effigy--not to get too far off topic, but to sit there and say calling Obama Barry is over the line, or that Obama has faced unprecedented hatred and disrespect is disingenuous and simply incorrect.

And where do I find the thread where all the conservative Iraq war supporters around here admit that Iraq was a mistake and admit they were wrong to support it?

In fact, they can post that here, now.

We'll be able to tell by how many make that admission whether or not you're full of shit.

what does one war have to do with another?

Not a thing.

The left wants us to admit that the only reason we are against going into Syria is that we hate Obama. They refuse to see any argument other than that... Unless you want to count the ones who want to throw the race card....

Once again, the world believed that Saddam was hiding WMD because he wanted Iran to believe he had them....

In Syria going against Assad is the same as fighting for AQ.......

But they refuse to understand these things....

No, the "world" didn't believe that. I'm not even sure if Bush & Cheney even believed it. But it sure was a great excuse to gain control over the oil.

 

[The T]

Synthaholic, you do remember the endless names Bush was called by the left? Hell, there was a book depicting his murder, dolls hanged in effigy--not to get too far off topic, but to sit there and say calling Obama Barry is over the line, or that Obama has faced unprecedented hatred and disrespect is disingenuous and simply incorrect.

what does one war have to do with another?

Not a thing.

The left wants us to admit that the only reason we are against going into Syria is that we hate Obama. They refuse to see any argument other than that... Unless you want to count the ones who want to throw the race card....

Once again, the world believed that Saddam was hiding WMD because he wanted Iran to believe he had them....

In Syria going against Assad is the same as fighting for AQ.......

But they refuse to understand these things....

No, the "world" didn't believe that. I'm not even sure if Bush & Cheney even believed it. But it sure was a great excuse to gain control over the oil.

Guess DEMS were fooled, eh?

*DUMBASS*

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhZ2ZvS2t_E"]Democrats confirm Saddam Hussein has WMD.flv - YouTube[/ame]

[SIZE=+1]Moscow Moved Weapons to Syria and Lebanon (WMDs Iraq)[/SIZE]


Pentagon official: Russia moved Saddam's WMD to Syria...



Putin is playin' yer BOY Obama like a fiddle and leading him OUT of the Middle East...

Thanks for playin', *JACKASS*

 

[SFC Ollie]

What is the difference in rationale between Iraq and Syria?

• Dictator/Tyrant has WMD capability
• Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here
• Danger to Israel
• De-stabilize ME

Right-Wing refusal to back strikes proves that Iraq really was only about controlling the oil.

Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here

Really? So if America does not launch a military strike on Syria, you believe that Assad will have his forces attack America and we will be fighting them here in America.

Is that your crazy assumption or can you back it up with something? I'm going to guess that it's your crazy assumption.

Because this sounds like liberal/democratic/progressive fear tactic bullshit, to scare people into getting behind Obama and supporting him against Syria.

First, that was Bush's argument, and you dutifully nodded your approval.

Are you only now realizing that you were a fool?


Second, it would be very easy for Assad to give CW to terrorists who could smuggle it into the U.S. a hell of a lot easier than a nuke.

Except that the terrorists are not on his side.....

 

[SFC Ollie]

Synthaholic, you do remember the endless names Bush was called by the left? Hell, there was a book depicting his murder, dolls hanged in effigy--not to get too far off topic, but to sit there and say calling Obama Barry is over the line, or that Obama has faced unprecedented hatred and disrespect is disingenuous and simply incorrect.

what does one war have to do with another?

Not a thing.

The left wants us to admit that the only reason we are against going into Syria is that we hate Obama. They refuse to see any argument other than that... Unless you want to count the ones who want to throw the race card....

Once again, the world believed that Saddam was hiding WMD because he wanted Iran to believe he had them....

In Syria going against Assad is the same as fighting for AQ.......

But they refuse to understand these things....

No, the "world" didn't believe that. I'm not even sure if Bush & Cheney even believed it. But it sure was a great excuse to gain control over the oil.

You refuse to admit that Saddam told us he pretended to have WMD because he did not want to appear weak to Iran?

Really?

You refuse to admit that intel from other countries matched ours?

You refuse to admit that the Clintons and Kerry along with dozens of other Democrat leaders believed it?

You have had way too much kool aide

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

What is the difference in rationale between Iraq and Syria?

• Dictator/Tyrant has WMD capability
• Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here
• Danger to Israel
• De-stabilize ME

Right-Wing refusal to back strikes proves that Iraq really was only about controlling the oil.

Okay, so I don't identify with the Republican party, but I gotta give them the edge on this one, and quite frankly, most Democrats have no room to ask for this comparison.

Iraq and Libya were more similar than you give them credit for. The primary difference is that we had overwhelming proof, common knowledge in fact, that Saddam had gassed his people and the Iranians many times during that conflict. What we weren't sure of was whether or not he still had chemical weapons when we went in there.

With Assad, the declassified "proof" (and as a side note, isn't this shit funny? Democrats saying to take their word for it that the info they're not giving us is incredibly damning, so we should just trust them to drop bombs based on top secret info from the same intelligence community that prevented 9/11 and told us accurately about the WMD's in Iraq) is, as much of the European press has stated, circumstantial at best.

In terms of oil, Iraq had a lot of it, Syria does not. However, if you think oil ain't playing into this, you're even more naïve than I gave you credit for when you said, "I'll believe you that you got some dead to rights evidence even though you won't tell me what it is. You folks have never steered me wrong about making war before. Let's go bomb some towel heads! Go Democrats!" Look up the pipe line proposal. Nuff said.

So the oil situation existed in both conflicts/potential conflicts. In one, the guy had definitely gassed the shit out of a lot of people, but only maybe still had the WMD's. In the other, the guy definitely still has his gas, but only maybe used it on his people. The argument could go either way on which was therefore the more righteous engagement.

Now, to come to my original point, that most Democrats have no business asking why Iraq but not Syria. You wanna know the primary reason the Iraq war had way more support than the Syrian war, aside from the obvious (that after more than a decade of warring in Iraq and Afghanistan, a lot of former hawks have come to the conclusion that forceful nation building is expensive and ultimately futile) is that we weren't just attacked. Remember 9/11? Lots of people were pretty emotional about that for a long time after it happened. We had lost the lives of 3000 civilian noncombatants in one attack and God damn it we were pissed off as a nation. Most of the nation, during that emotional backlash, were all for fucking up anybody responsible, anybody associated with them, anybody who acted like them, anybody who was cool with them, anybody who had ever bummed an Al Qaeda operative a cigarette. . . you get the picture.

Now, when shit like the Aurora shooting happens, every Democrat with a television camera in front of them hollers about gun control and, more importantly, how we have to do something quickly, before this tragedy fades from memory. Then, if you don't agree with their measures, they parade out victims and families of victims to make you feel bad, as though your knee jerk emotional reaction should supersede logical function and, in stead of arguing through the points that you don't agree with, they expect you to just be shamed into shutting the fuck up and going along with whatever they say is necessary to make us safe. Essentially, Democrats have a heavy track record of encouraging, even outright demanding the same sort of irrational emotional responses that accounted for a whole shitload of Americans supporting war right after 9/11, but not so much 12 years later.

So, don't demand emotional legislation when it suits you and then wag your finger self-righteously in the face of the irrational on those occasions when their emotions don't line up with your agenda. You can't have your cake and eat it to. You want logic or emotion? Decide.

 

[kaz]

Synthaholic, you do remember the endless names Bush was called by the left? Hell, there was a book depicting his murder, dolls hanged in effigy--not to get too far off topic, but to sit there and say calling Obama Barry is over the line, or that Obama has faced unprecedented hatred and disrespect is disingenuous and simply incorrect.

what does one war have to do with another?

Not a thing.

The left wants us to admit that the only reason we are against going into Syria is that we hate Obama. They refuse to see any argument other than that... Unless you want to count the ones who want to throw the race card....

Once again, the world believed that Saddam was hiding WMD because he wanted Iran to believe he had them....

In Syria going against Assad is the same as fighting for AQ.......

But they refuse to understand these things....

No, the "world" didn't believe that. I'm not even sure if Bush & Cheney even believed it. But it sure was a great excuse to gain control over the oil.

I guess we don't know what everyone in the world thought, but the UN, French, Russians and Germans said he did and they all had better Iraq intelligence then we did.

I opposed Iraq because they were not a threat to us. So I can be honest about what happened. You have to just keep justifying the lie that you were lied to.

BTW, on your avatar, are you ever going to get over Paul Ryan running you up the flag pole by your underwear in high school? Wasn't that like 20 some years ago?