Our President....Really ????

[RobG]

and what is the difference? either you go in for the right reasons, or you go in for the wrong ones. seems the only difference is in the letter behind the persons name that says "go".

What's the difference? With one you wound up killing 5000 of our children and disabling another 32,000 of them. With the other you lob a few cruise missiles at Syrian targets, expressly prohibiting boots on the ground. Are you really confused about this?

 

[TLC]

What's the difference? With one you wound up killing 5000 of our children and disabling another 32,000 of them. With the other you lob a few cruise missiles at Syrian targets, expressly prohibiting boots on the ground. Are you really confused about this?

what confuses me is you experts who make stuff up.

"The EU endorsed a "clear and strong response" to a chemical weapons attack but didn't indicate what type of response they were backing."

so where does your information come from? or are you making it up as you go? no one has said there will NOT be boots on the ground. that's the difference.

 

[schmalts]

Schmalts - not trying to get involved in this discussion but there is a world of difference between invading Iraq to effect "regime change" and lobbing a few cruise missiles at targets in Syria.

Really? I don't think you read my post well enough. It was about hypocrisy at it's finest. And you really think our mission would not be to make another regime change? Heck that is all they ever do!

 

[rhomas]

Excuse me, but killing 5000 Syrian children and 32,000 disabled, aren't OUR children. Besides, who is actually using those chemical weapons? Is it the Assad Regime, the Muslim Brotherhood, or Al Quaeda? We can't be certain, and as for the EU, they are a bunch of piss ant crybabies who want the US to defend their interests at American expense without endangering themselves. If France, Turkey or any of the other countries want to do something, then let 'em have at it. If we get involved, eventually there WILL be boots on the ground, and then attacks against American interests. It isn't our war, it isn't affecting our nation, and we shouldn't get involved until the day American interests are in danger. Then and only then we should attack with all the military might we can muster and civilians and militants be damned. If NATO or the UN really gave a damn about what's going on in Syria, they'd get involved there, instead of trying to convince Obama to force a DOJ indictment of George Zimmerman and pushing the UN Gun Ban Treaty down our throats! The United States is not the world's keeper; and the sooner the dip sh*t in the White House learns that lesson, the better off we will be.

BTW, the actions of the Bush administration against an obvious clear and present danger to the safety of the US and it's citizens can not be compared to any perceived internal conflicts of a Syrian civil war! The fact that the same intelligence sources that provided Bush's White House with info about WMDs in Iraq, are the same sources Obama ridiculed; but now wants to accept as the basis for wanting to take action against Syria. Anyone else see the hypocrisy of this??????????

 

[noharleyyet]

Excuse me, but killing 5000 Syrian children and 32,000 disabled, aren't OUR children

Actually, Rob is correct with the numbers and the pronoun.

 

[RobG]

what confuses me is you experts who make stuff up.

"The EU endorsed a "clear and strong response" to a chemical weapons attack but didn't indicate what type of response they were backing."

so where does your information come from? or are you making it up as you go? no one has said there will NOT be boots on the ground. that's the difference.

Hey look, I'm not for or against this, but good grief to some basic research. Here:
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/09/04/pentagon-spokesman-no-boots-on-the-ground-in-syria/

And here is the bigger hawk who was the alternative to Obama:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...ses-impeachment-if-boots-hit-ground-in-syria/

Whether you are for or against this it really isn't that freaking hard to understand what is being debated.

Best,
rg

 

[MHMT]

Hey! It's fall! These threads are for ice fishing season. I came on hunt talk hoping to look at dead animals and I find this crap...

 

[rhomas]

noharleyyet, how do Syrian citizens, regardless of age, become OURS???????? They aren't American, so they can't be OURS!!!!!!! Our children are killed everyday in Gun Free Zones and in the inner cities..........not in a foreign country!!!!!!

 

[noharleyyet]

With one you wound up killing 5000 of our children and disabling another 32,000 of them

rhomas, US Soldiers killed and wounded (our children? yes)

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_casualties.htm

Not picking on you...

 

[noharleyyet]

Hey! It's fall! These threads are for ice fishing season. I came on hunt talk hoping to look at dead animals and I find this crap...

..yet you were compelled to open and.... contribute?

 

[rhomas]

noharleyyet, in that context I agree with you; but I don't believe that was what Rob meant when he made his post. I understood him to be speaking about the Syrians. If I misunderstood his intent and misconstrued his context, then I owe him an apology.

BTW MHMT, what is this "ice fishing" you speak of??????????????????

 

[MHMT]

..yet you were compelled to open and.... contribute?

I know... I am disappointed in myself for opening it.

 

[noharleyyet]

noharleyyet, in that context I agree with you; but I don't believe that was what Rob meant when he made his post. I understood him to be speaking about the Syrians. If I misunderstood his intent and misconstrued his context, then I owe him an apology.

BTW MHMT, what is this "ice fishing" you speak of??????????????????

...and if I'm wrong I owe you an apology.

In the meantime, back to the disparagement at hand;

 

[OriginalOscar]

wasn't his father born in Kenya? just a little factoid for ya. his WHITE mother was born in the USA. guess that makes him a white African American. right?

Correct on the parents.

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Looks like we are good to go unless you have another fact to share.

 

[Gunner46]

LMAO. I'm loving this !

 

[RobG]

noharleyyet, how do Syrian citizens, regardless of age, become OURS???????? They aren't American, so they can't be OURS!!!!!!! Our children are killed everyday in Gun Free Zones and in the inner cities..........not in a foreign country!!!!!!

Rhomas - Sorry I wasn't clear - I was talking about U.S. soldiers and citizens that were killed/wounded in the Iraq war, roughly 5,000 and 32,000 respectively.

In hindsight I should not have said "children." Every U.S. soldier that has died or had his/her legs blown off was and brave man or woman, but also someone's child. When my kids are old enough to be in the military they will still be my children. That is what I meant, but I should have used a different word.

I agree that just because Syrian children have died doesn't mean we should go bombing Syria. However, a targeted strike might help send a message (with limited risk to us) that will prevent future chemical weapons strikes/proliferation by Syria and other countries and that is the only reason why I would support that option.

Take care,
Rob

 

[RobG]

.
In the meantime, back to the disparagement at hand;

Yup, Obama painted himself into a corner.

 

[CabinFever]

WELL SAID rhomas!

So help us....

 

[CabinFever]

WELL SAID rhomas!

I lean pretty hard to the "right", but this statement scares me just as bad as Obama.

 

[YoungNVHunter]

Posted from cell and tried to copy his first post of the thread, didn't post properly. I just liked what he had to say and agree with it.