It is pretty hard to express how not excited I am for this. I swear that Obama is a secret plant by the Republicans to rip the still beating heart out of the Democratic party.
US efforts to stabilize and destabilize regions in the Middle East has been an unmitigated disaster both for selfish US police, and for the poor bastards that live there. The US props up regimes that she die, thus building up civil pressure, and kick over ones that need to slowly dismantle themselves in order to relieve that pressure. The US has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, it has no fucking clue what it is doing. The US should stay out.
My one shabby hope is that the if the US is going to do this, that it simply goes after the chemical weapons and tries to make this be about eliminating those weapons quickly and calling it a day. I really doubt that is going to happen. Asking the US military to ignore a delicious military formation that is just sitting right there! is like asking a coke fiend to ignore the pile of what powder sitting on the table.
Mr. President, please DO NOT lead your country into yet another futile war. Do the right thing for a change.
Don't just post here. Let them know what you think http://www.contactingthecongress.org/
Is it me or do GWB jr and Obama have similar ears? Eerily similar too the chemical Kurd attack in Irap. Strange the video link does not refresh to view further. I was distracted for a bit as it auto started.
I don't believe for a second this is even about chemical weapons. The US did not flinch when Saddam used chemical weapons against his own population back in the eighties, when he was still our friend. They did not flinch years before that, when he used it in the war against Iran. I believed the US even supplied these chemical weapons in the first place.
So why are we supposed to believe in this sudden concern for the use of chemical weapons in Syria? Also remember, that we're talking about one incident where the regime maybe killed about 300 people with chemical weapons. But 100,000 people were already killed in Syria with conventional weapons. Any action taken against chemical weapons will still not deal with the killing in Syria, they will continue as before.
Whom ever is in Office, it's lonely at the top.
First Iraq then Libya, Syria, Lebanon, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran. It's in the five -year Master Plan as described by General Wesley Clark:
I do not willing endorse the sentiments conveyed by the author or site host of this thread.
your neighbourhood friendly poster.
Oh look, another map that cuts off at the border with Canada. How am I supposed to find my Congressman on that? It won't even let me type in my postal code. Thanks Obama!
Well. That was bland.
I think the president will do exactly as Israel tells him to do, but he needs political cover. The easiest possible way to do this is to kick the responsibility down to the bought-and-paid-for congress, who will instantly vote their $$$$$$consciences$$$$$$. The cruise missiles will be flying ASAP. It fascinates me how the U.S. government operates exactly like a corporation -- it does things and no single person is responsible or can be held responsible for those things.
Also, Putin is playing Obama like a halibut, so Obama will have to put his penis on display here proving he's a manly man.
And I'll bet there is no discussion at all among Obama's circle regarding taking NO action. Nobody in the real world wants this American aggression.
Attacking Syria has the added bonus of aiding al Qaeda in Syria against Assad.
[Psst, and hey! Nobody mention the American use of white phosphorus in Iraq.]
You can borrow one nearby to my own if you're of a mind to do so. 27609. Have fun.
So the timeline has been modified. Which countries in General Clark's list have we failed to invade? That's right - Syria. Obama is the empty suit plastic man in office at the moment and I hope a few people wake up to the reality of what is happening in front of their eyes. The Nobel Peace Prize winning president is starting an unprovoked war of aggression.
Regardless of who is in office - the War Machine will have its way with the world's land/resources. Our government will do its bidding and the war profiteers will make their millions and billions of dollars.
It's not supposed to end the killing of civilians, much less the civil war. It's supposed to be a punitive measure, like throwing a guy in jail for killing their wife. It's done to satisfy society's need for 'justice' and to inflict punishment. The wife's already dead, and you're not saving the next. At best, you might maybe sorta theoretically deter the next guy.
At both scales, the state level and the individual level, there's a pretty good amount of evidence that this sort of punishment doesn't actually work as a deterrent. But we still do it. It's hard to just shrug your shoulders and say "what's done is done", even though that's likely the case.
Lonely? He has literal hordes of peoples telling him what to do.
He is just the top of the iceberg, just a speaker.
I cant believe that Americans still think of the president as the ONLY one who takes decisions on the White House, that's so XVIII Century!
Apparently Harper is "reluctantly" supporting the US blowing up some shit in Syria. Not actually involving the Canadian military at all, just approving of the US military doing so. So I guess I could contact my Member of Parliament and get a form letter back.
Thanks for the link. Did it.
True about the entourage although The President signs the paper, not the pressing throng.
Back in those yearly years of ladder climbing, thinking , gosh the rope is pulling me up sort of stuff gets old time when the lives of others are in the balance of your elected pen stroke.
next page →