SecState Kerry: Bombing Syria is not "going to war". Really.

Little-Acorn

Gold Member
Jun 20, 2006
10,025
2,410
290
San Diego, CA
Interesting.

I'd thought I'd heard it all from these leftists, but this is a new one.

Slinging bomb-laden cruise missiles at a foreign country that has not attacked us, is no longer an act of war. It's now merely "degrading the capacity of a man".

Maybe he's using that phrase, because "overseas contingency operation" and "workplace violence" were already taken?

There will be no "boots on the ground", after all.

BTW, I guess that means that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, also wasn't an act of war. It was, after all, only a "limited air strike" aimed at "degrading the capacity" our Navy in the Pacific ocean

True also for the 9/11 attacks. No boots on the ground there, remember.

I'm so glad this administration is there to give us the REAL definitions of these things. Think how confused and misled we'd be without them.

----------------------------------------------

SecState Kerry announces that bombing Syria is not "going to war"

Russia's Putin warns US against 'aggression' in Syria without UN approval - World News

(snip)

"The president is not asking you to go to war," Kerry said in response to a question asked by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. "He’s simply saying we need to take an action that can degrade the capacity of a man who’s willing to kill his own people by breaking a nearly 100-year-old prohibition, and will we stand up and be counted to say we won’t do that."
 
Interesting.

I'd thought I'd heard it all from these leftists, but this is a new one.

Slinging bomb-laden cruise missiles at a foreign country that has not attacked us, is no longer an act of war. It's now merely "degrading the capacity of a man".

Maybe he's using that phrase, because "overseas contingency operation" and "workplace violence" were already taken?

There will be no "boots on the ground", after all.

BTW, I guess that means that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, also wasn't an act of war. It was, after all, only a "limited air strike" aimed at "degrading the capacity" our Navy in the Pacific ocean

True also for the 9/11 attacks. No boots on the ground there, remember.

I'm so glad this administration is there to give us the REAL definitions of these things. Think how confused and misled we'd be without them.

----------------------------------------------

SecState Kerry announces that bombing Syria is not "going to war"

Russia's Putin warns US against 'aggression' in Syria without UN approval - World News

(snip)

"The president is not asking you to go to war," Kerry said in response to a question asked by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. "He’s simply saying we need to take an action that can degrade the capacity of a man who’s willing to kill his own people by breaking a nearly 100-year-old prohibition, and will we stand up and be counted to say we won’t do that."

I can well imagine that Barry would label it "workplace violence".

I wonder what his royal highness would call it if a SCUD was suddenly seen flying toward the White House?
 
Holy toledo! The bullshit is never ending with this crew. Now another "new phrase". I can't wait for the montage of left wing media pundits who pick it up and run with this new one.

They want regime change and they will have no option but to put boots on the ground to secure Assad's chemical weapons.

Panetta already testified that 75,000 would be needed just to secure the facilities in Syria.

It's unreal how they lie.
 
Last edited:
Holy toledo! The bullshit is never ending with this crew. Now another "new phrase". I can't wait for the montage of left wing media pundits who pick it up and run with this new one.

They want regime change and they will have no option but to put boots on the ground to secure Assad's chemical weapons.

Panetta already testified that 75,000 would be needed just to secure the facilities in Syria.

It's unreal how they lie.

Ok--let's assume for a second that the administration are really nice guys and don't want to lie. Could we safely assume then that they are scared shitless to tell the truth ?
 
Interesting.

I'd thought I'd heard it all from these leftists, but this is a new one.

Slinging bomb-laden cruise missiles at a foreign country that has not attacked us, is no longer an act of war. It's now merely "degrading the capacity of a man".

Maybe he's using that phrase, because "overseas contingency operation" and "workplace violence" were already taken?

There will be no "boots on the ground", after all.

BTW, I guess that means that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, also wasn't an act of war. It was, after all, only a "limited air strike" aimed at "degrading the capacity" our Navy in the Pacific ocean

True also for the 9/11 attacks. No boots on the ground there, remember.

I'm so glad this administration is there to give us the REAL definitions of these things. Think how confused and misled we'd be without them.

----------------------------------------------

SecState Kerry announces that bombing Syria is not "going to war"

Russia's Putin warns US against 'aggression' in Syria without UN approval - World News

(snip)

"The president is not asking you to go to war," Kerry said in response to a question asked by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. "He’s simply saying we need to take an action that can degrade the capacity of a man who’s willing to kill his own people by breaking a nearly 100-year-old prohibition, and will we stand up and be counted to say we won’t do that."

I can well imagine that Barry would label it "workplace violence".

I wonder what his royal highness would call it if a SCUD was suddenly seen flying toward the White House?
He'd blame it on the Republicans for not supporting him.
 
:lol:
Interesting.

I'd thought I'd heard it all from these leftists, but this is a new one.

Slinging bomb-laden cruise missiles at a foreign country that has not attacked us, is no longer an act of war. It's now merely "degrading the capacity of a man".

Maybe he's using that phrase, because "overseas contingency operation" and "workplace violence" were already taken?

There will be no "boots on the ground", after all.

BTW, I guess that means that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, also wasn't an act of war. It was, after all, only a "limited air strike" aimed at "degrading the capacity" our Navy in the Pacific ocean

True also for the 9/11 attacks. No boots on the ground there, remember.

I'm so glad this administration is there to give us the REAL definitions of these things. Think how confused and misled we'd be without them.

----------------------------------------------

SecState Kerry announces that bombing Syria is not "going to war"

Russia's Putin warns US against 'aggression' in Syria without UN approval - World News

(snip)

"The president is not asking you to go to war," Kerry said in response to a question asked by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. "He’s simply saying we need to take an action that can degrade the capacity of a man who’s willing to kill his own people by breaking a nearly 100-year-old prohibition, and will we stand up and be counted to say we won’t do that."

I can well imagine that Barry would label it "workplace violence".

I wonder what his royal highness would call it if a SCUD was suddenly seen flying toward the White House?
He'd blame it on the Republicans for not supporting him.


:lol::lol::lol:
 
How can John-Fin'g Kerry (whom served in Viet Nam), get away with saying that lobbing missles into a country that hasn't attacked YOU, NOT an act of WAR?

Is this what passes as Statist/Leftist intelligence these days?
 
Last edited:
It has been done by almost every president in the modern era. Both GOP and Dems have done it, but now it's an issue. Put your heads back into the sand, soon there maybe a GOP president.
 
It has been done by almost every president in the modern era. Both GOP and Dems have done it, but now it's an issue. Put your heads back into the sand, soon there maybe a GOP president.

America has no vested interest in bombing Syria except to assuage Obama's ego. Syria has done nothing to America to warrant you bombing the shit out of the country and killing innocent civilians.

No reason whatsoever unless you really believe you should become "world enforcers". Or is it that Obama's bored with drone assassinations and he wants to go "big time".
 

Forum List

Back
Top