so let me get this straight about Syria

[Zoom-boing]

Romney didn't win and there is no basis for the suggestion he would have pushed for war with Iran or anyone else.

This is all obama.

Romney, Gingrich at GOP debate: We'd go to war to keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

PARTANBURG, S.C. -- Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich said at the Republican presidential debate here Saturday night that they would be willing to go to war to keep Iran from attaining nuclear weapons if all other strategies failed.

Romney said that if "crippling sanctions" and other strategies fail, military action would be on the table because it is "unacceptable" for Iran to become a nuclear power.

Yes no basis at all besides him stating he would. go troll someplace else.

What will Obama do to keep Iran from obtaining nukes, if all other strategies fail?

 

[Samson]

Remember when the Russians moved a Naval strike force to oppose us in the Persian Gulf with Booooooooooooooooooosh?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The pro-Iraq war Right would never admit they were wrong for thinking that Iraq was a brilliant idea,

at least they'd never admit it directly.

But this whole Syria affair has gotten them, en masse, to indirectly admit they were dead wrong.

See...we told you so.

The beauty of time is that eventually everything the Right does comes back to bite them.

 

[Zoom-boing]

You are using violations of international law. you are using the money factor. You are using the we don't belong there factor. You are using the leave them alone and let them sort things out opinion.

You are using these things and yet somehow people are supposed to believe you based on the history of the right? Really are you people joking or something? Are you really that blind and partisan to think people wouldnt just go back and look at your opinions in the past years?

This isnt because a black man is in office. So lets get that out of the way. This is purely ( for most) a partisan issue. Watching people flip a 180 on this issue that is exactly like Iraq ( all for the actual use of chemical weapons, ( which as of right now we dont know who used them. Feel free to provide evidence of who did it))

We had Zero business in Iraq and we have zero business in Syria.

Sadly had Romney won and he pushed for his war with Iran, most of you people would have supported his invasion of Iran like good cattle.

I guess thats the saddest thing about partisans these days. you are not out to do the correct thing for people. You are out to win and crush your " enemies". Sadly the nation comes 2nd if not lower...

shame.

You are using these things and yet somehow people are supposed to believe you based on the history of the left? Really are you people joking or something? Are you really that blind and partisan to think people wouldnt just go back and look at your opinions in the past years?

OR

You are using these things and yet somehow people are supposed to believe you based on the history of the Obama? Really are you people joking or something? Are you really that blind and partisan to think people wouldnt just go back and look at your opinions in the past years?


(The second one for the win!)

 

[kaz]

We had Zero business in Iraq and we have zero business in Syria

Let me get this straight. The sides flip flopped and the only hypocrisy you see is the Republicans?

 

[Samson]

Romney didn't win and there is no basis for the suggestion he would have pushed for war with Iran or anyone else.

This is all obama.

Romney, Gingrich at GOP debate: We'd go to war to keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

PARTANBURG, S.C. -- Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich said at the Republican presidential debate here Saturday night that they would be willing to go to war to keep Iran from attaining nuclear weapons if all other strategies failed.

Romney said that if "crippling sanctions" and other strategies fail, military action would be on the table because it is "unacceptable" for Iran to become a nuclear power.

Yes no basis at all besides him stating he would. go troll someplace else.

What will Obama do to keep Iran from obtaining nukes, if all other strategies fail?

"Other Strategies?"



Like what?

 

[Zoom-boing]

Romney, Gingrich at GOP debate: We'd go to war to keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons - Political Hotsheet - CBS News



Yes no basis at all besides him stating he would. go troll someplace else.

What will Obama do to keep Iran from obtaining nukes, if all other strategies fail?

"Other Strategies?"



Like what?

Diplomatic approaches. Sanctions. Telling them to knock if off. et al.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You are using violations of international law. you are using the money factor. You are using the we don't belong there factor. You are using the leave them alone and let them sort things out opinion.

You are using these things and yet somehow people are supposed to believe you based on the history of the right? Really are you people joking or something? Are you really that blind and partisan to think people wouldnt just go back and look at your opinions in the past years?

This isnt because a black man is in office. So lets get that out of the way. This is purely ( for most) a partisan issue. Watching people flip a 180 on this issue that is exactly like Iraq ( all for the actual use of chemical weapons, ( which as of right now we dont know who used them. Feel free to provide evidence of who did it))

We had Zero business in Iraq and we have zero business in Syria.

Sadly had Romney won and he pushed for his war with Iran, most of you people would have supported his invasion of Iran like good cattle.

I guess thats the saddest thing about partisans these days. you are not out to do the correct thing for people. You are out to win and crush your " enemies". Sadly the nation comes 2nd if not lower...

shame.

Can oyu show me where I ever adovcating for the Neo-Con scum or the Progressive Thugs declaring global corporatist wars?

There are A LOT of Libertarians on this message board.

However, I admit, there are many blind Repugnantcans that do the partisan flip, simply because it's the Democrats.

But, furthermore, you're an equally blind and partisan Progressive, as none of your posts have ever suggested anything to the contrary. Throwing stones in a glass house.

i am against Iraq, Syria, Libya, Invading Iran, pulling troops home and not being the world police. I have been for this since around 2002.

My stance has been solid.

I summed up my position in my sig line.

Remember when the mainstream of the Right HATED the Ron Paul types, re foreign policy?

They're all Paulbots now. lol

 

[Samson]

The pro-Iraq war Right would never admit they were wrong for thinking that Iraq was a brilliant idea,

at least they'd never admit it directly.

But this whole Syria affair has gotten them, en masse, to indirectly admit they were dead wrong.

See...we told you so.

The beauty of time is that eventually everything the Right does comes back to bite them.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: Your POV is through Partisan-Colored glasses.

The bill that allowed the war to proceed with Iraq was written by both parties, and passed by members of both parties.

 

[NYcarbineer]

We had Zero business in Iraq and we have zero business in Syria

Let me get this straight. The sides flip flopped and the only hypocrisy you see is the Republicans?

How many liberals on USMB can you name who opposed the war in Iraq, but now want to go to war with Syria?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

You are using violations of international law. you are using the money factor. You are using the we don't belong there factor. You are using the leave them alone and let them sort things out opinion.

You are using these things and yet somehow people are supposed to believe you based on the history of the right? Really are you people joking or something? Are you really that blind and partisan to think people wouldnt just go back and look at your opinions in the past years?

This isnt because a black man is in office. So lets get that out of the way. This is purely ( for most) a partisan issue. Watching people flip a 180 on this issue that is exactly like Iraq ( all for the actual use of chemical weapons, ( which as of right now we dont know who used them. Feel free to provide evidence of who did it))

We had Zero business in Iraq and we have zero business in Syria.

Sadly had Romney won and he pushed for his war with Iran, most of you people would have supported his invasion of Iran like good cattle.

I guess thats the saddest thing about partisans these days. you are not out to do the correct thing for people. You are out to win and crush your " enemies". Sadly the nation comes 2nd if not lower...

shame.

Most GOPers would gladly bomb Iran righ now, and everyone knows it. It's one reason why Romney lost. Conservatives just don't get it.

Purely speculation on your part. Now, for the facts: O is pushing for war and bombs.

 

[kwc57]

You are using violations of international law. you are using the money factor. You are using the we don't belong there factor. You are using the leave them alone and let them sort things out opinion.

You are using these things and yet somehow people are supposed to believe you based on the history of the right? Really are you people joking or something? Are you really that blind and partisan to think people wouldnt just go back and look at your opinions in the past years?

This isnt because a black man is in office. So lets get that out of the way. This is purely ( for most) a partisan issue. Watching people flip a 180 on this issue that is exactly like Iraq ( all for the actual use of chemical weapons, ( which as of right now we dont know who used them. Feel free to provide evidence of who did it))

We had Zero business in Iraq and we have zero business in Syria.

Sadly had Romney won and he pushed for his war with Iran, most of you people would have supported his invasion of Iran like good cattle.

I guess thats the saddest thing about partisans these days. you are not out to do the correct thing for people. You are out to win and crush your " enemies". Sadly the nation comes 2nd if not lower...

shame.

You fail to note that both parties are hypocrites. Depending on who is in power and responding to world events determines which way you will come down on the issue. If this were happening under Romney, the Dems that are for it today and the Repubs who are against it today would just be flip-flopped and you know that is true.

Regardless......based on history, we need to leave other nations the fuck alone and stay out of their business. Seems that is what the majority of Americans outside the beltway want. Dems and Repubs need to pay heed to what Joe Q Public is saying if they have any desire to be reelected.

 

[Samson]

What will Obama do to keep Iran from obtaining nukes, if all other strategies fail?

"Other Strategies?"



Like what?

Diplomatic approaches. Sanctions. Telling them to knock if off. et al.

What about asking them to stand in the corner, and be in "time out?"

None of this is "strategic."

 

[NYcarbineer]

The pro-Iraq war Right would never admit they were wrong for thinking that Iraq was a brilliant idea,

at least they'd never admit it directly.

But this whole Syria affair has gotten them, en masse, to indirectly admit they were dead wrong.

See...we told you so.

The beauty of time is that eventually everything the Right does comes back to bite them.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: Your POV is through Partisan-Colored glasses.

The bill that allowed the war to proceed with Iraq was written by both parties, and passed by members of both parties.

That's simply not true. Most Democrats voted against the Iraq war authorization.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Syria is not the problem.
The problem is China and Russia selling these fucked up countries advanced weaponry.
That's the problem.
But we won't talk about that will we? Nooo, because we want to do business with China. We don't want computers to cost $100 more, we don't want iPhones to cost $50 more...we loooove the $400 32" TV's...what would we do without cheap electronics?
We all have a play in this.

Do you have a Russian TV?

No do you?
But we all have electronics throughout all of our homes made by Foxconn.
The computer you watch, your phone, your TV, the electronics in your car - your refrigerator...we all want cheaper and cheaper prices. That is accomplished by abusing Chinese labor. Without China, - ALL electronics would be more expensive.
And THAT is more important than Syria. Because U.S. companies wouldn't DREAM of dropping Chinese labor because WE wouldn't dream of accepting higher prices for a better world.

 

[Zoom-boing]

"Other Strategies?"



Like what?

Diplomatic approaches. Sanctions. Telling them to knock if off. et al.

What about asking them to stand in the corner, and be in "time out?"

None of this is "strategic."

Samson! You've forgotten who our fearless leader is. Strategic is in the eye of the Obama's mind because RED LINE!

 

[kwc57]

You are using violations of international law. you are using the money factor. You are using the we don't belong there factor. You are using the leave them alone and let them sort things out opinion.

You are using these things and yet somehow people are supposed to believe you based on the history of the right? Really are you people joking or something? Are you really that blind and partisan to think people wouldnt just go back and look at your opinions in the past years?

This isnt because a black man is in office. So lets get that out of the way. This is purely ( for most) a partisan issue. Watching people flip a 180 on this issue that is exactly like Iraq ( all for the actual use of chemical weapons, ( which as of right now we dont know who used them. Feel free to provide evidence of who did it))

We had Zero business in Iraq and we have zero business in Syria.

Sadly had Romney won and he pushed for his war with Iran, most of you people would have supported his invasion of Iran like good cattle.

I guess thats the saddest thing about partisans these days. you are not out to do the correct thing for people. You are out to win and crush your " enemies". Sadly the nation comes 2nd if not lower...

shame.

Most GOPers would gladly bomb Iran righ now, and everyone knows it. It's one reason why Romney lost. Conservatives just don't get it.

Not defending the GOP, but you do realize that Syria presents no actual threat to our nation or our interests where on the other hand, Iran with their nuclear program and stated goals do indeed pose a threat. Liberals just don't get it.

 

[Samson]

The pro-Iraq war Right would never admit they were wrong for thinking that Iraq was a brilliant idea,

at least they'd never admit it directly.

But this whole Syria affair has gotten them, en masse, to indirectly admit they were dead wrong.

See...we told you so.

The beauty of time is that eventually everything the Right does comes back to bite them.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: Your POV is through Partisan-Colored glasses.

The bill that allowed the war to proceed with Iraq was written by both parties, and passed by members of both parties.

That's simply not true. Most Democrats voted against the Iraq war authorization.

No sure where you get your info, but the Partisan-Colored Glasses seem to be firmly affixed.

I never said ALL Democrats voted for the Iraq War resolution, but many did, and it would not have passed without them:

82 (40%) of 209 Democratic Representatives voted for the resolution

58% of Democratic senators (29 of 50) voted for the resolution


Dick Gephardt (D) co-authored the bill.

 

[Samson]

Diplomatic approaches. Sanctions. Telling them to knock if off. et al.

What about asking them to stand in the corner, and be in "time out?"

None of this is "strategic."

Samson! You've forgotten who our fearless leader is. Strategic is in the eye of the Obama's mind because RED LINE!

Interesting thing about the "Red Line:" It did not appear until AFTER the elections in November......

 

[MACAULAY]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: Your POV is through Partisan-Colored glasses.

The bill that allowed the war to proceed with Iraq was written by both parties, and passed by members of both parties.

That's simply not true. Most Democrats voted against the Iraq war authorization.

No sure where you get your info, but the Partisan-Colored Glasses seem to be firmly affixed.

I never said ALL Democrats voted for the Iraq War resolution, but many did, and it would not have passed without them:

82 (40%) of 209 Democratic Representatives voted for the resolution

58% of Democratic senators (29 of 50) voted for the resolution


Dick Gephardt (D) co-authored the bill.

.................................................................

Nothing like being beat about the head and shoulders with facts.