http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/chemical-weapons-syria-europe/2013/06/13/id/509854 What do you think? Get involved??
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Syria Crosses Obama's 'Red Line'
- Thread starter Jedi Knight
- Start date
saturneptune
New Member
Exactly the opposite. We have no business in this conflict. The national security interests of the United States are not threatened and the Congress has not declared war. That is the Constitutional standard. It is not worth one American life, or one penny of tax money.
When will we learn? Ho Chi Minh, the Mujahideen, and now the Syrian rebels...
And any military action will be supported by the UK:thumbs: :laugh:
Thanks! I agree. The US has always spoken against Assad and his father as well as the Ba'ath Party for over 30 years, but for the moment Assad is better than his opponents who are now connected with the most radical Islamofascists. Obama has been consistently wrong on the Arab world problems and his inexperience and bad advisors are plain to see.
Bob Alkire
New Member
I'm with you on this one!!!
Tom Bryant
Well-Known Member
So he will go into a conflict on the side of those who have pledged allegiance to Al Quida?
Stop trying to play global policeman and tactician.
Stop trying to play global policeman and tactician.
Sadly, yes, although Conservative MPs here are insisting that the Commons are allowed a vote on it before Call Me Dave does a Tony Blair on us.
The Nobel Peace Prize winner is going to arm Al-Queda. He's so smart...yeah, I can see why liberals love him.
Speaking of liberals, when do the anti-war protests start against our war-mongering imperialism?
Speaking of liberals, when do the anti-war protests start against our war-mongering imperialism?
Thanks! Great post! As you know, the older generation always said that Democrats got us into wars--Wilson, FDR, Truman, LBJ.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Does anyone else find this role reversal interesting? Republicans were all about leveling Iraq to get rid of Saddam for all the same reasons Obama wants to level Syria to get rid of Assad. C'mon guys Assad has WMDs and kills his own people! Bush said the same thing about Saddam and republicans couldn't wait to go to war. So what's changed besides the party in power?
Last edited by a moderator:
saturneptune
New Member
What has changed? The exact thing that has changed is your position on the matter. In another thread, you just mocked me and others for saying we should stay out of Syria. Do you even bother to read what posters write?
IMHO it doesn't matter who's in power here in the States, whether weak, weaker, or strong, stronger.
I think it's in the American government psyche, there are systems in place, currents and undercurrents in politics and policies that compels America to act and think it's the big brother of this world and it's a big brother that plays favorites.
Right now this American admin wants to mess around with Syria and supply the "rebels" with small weapons above the table, never mind that after they get their "freedom" and "democracy" (like they know what those words mean) they'll turn the same weapons against Americans.
Which makes us world-class suckers.
Personally, I think we should stay out of Syria, or ANY country with like problems.
Heck, we couldn't even begin to solve our own problems here.
I think it's in the American government psyche, there are systems in place, currents and undercurrents in politics and policies that compels America to act and think it's the big brother of this world and it's a big brother that plays favorites.
Right now this American admin wants to mess around with Syria and supply the "rebels" with small weapons above the table, never mind that after they get their "freedom" and "democracy" (like they know what those words mean) they'll turn the same weapons against Americans.
Which makes us world-class suckers.
Personally, I think we should stay out of Syria, or ANY country with like problems.
Heck, we couldn't even begin to solve our own problems here.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Do you understand the concept of sarcasm? I have consistently been against all these unconstitutional foreign interventions. You've stalked me around this board long enough to know that.
My position has never changed. That's how I know there has been a role reversal. Republicans couldn't wait to invade Iraq because "Saddam was a bad dude with wmd's" But now republicans are against going into Syria even though "Assad is a bad dude with wmd's". Now democrats are for going into Syria because "Assad is a bad dude with wmd's" but were against going into Iraq because "Saddam was a bad dude with wmd's".
A complete role reversal on both sides.
So I ask again what has changed besides the party in power?
Last edited by a moderator:
Some of us learn from our mistakes; others make the same ones over again.
poncho
Well-Known Member
That's true enough. I learned from my mistake. I supported G. W. until I figured out we'd been NEOCONNED.
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The modern-day, limited-government movement has been co-opted. The conservatives have failed in their effort to shrink the size of government. There has not been, nor will there soon be, a conservative revolution in Washington. Political party control of the federal government has changed, but the inexorable growth in the size and scope of government has continued unabated. The liberal arguments for limited government in personal affairs and foreign military adventurism were never seriously considered as part of this revolution. [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif] Since the change of the political party in charge has not made a difference, who's really in charge? If the particular party in power makes little difference, whose policy is it that permits expanded government programs, increased spending, huge deficits, nation building and the pervasive invasion of our privacy, with fewer Fourth Amendment protections than ever before? [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif] Someone is responsible, and it's important that those of us who love liberty, and resent big-brother government, identify the philosophic supporters who have the most to say about the direction our country is going. If they're wrong – and I believe they are – we need to show it, alert the American people, and offer a more positive approach to government. [/FONT]
That was enough to wake me up to the fact that government isn't at the top of the power structure and I've been trying to alert the American people ever since.
How about you? Did you learn from being neoconned? Evidently not as you have consistently ran interference for the "[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]philosophic supporters who have the most to say about the direction our country is going[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]" [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]aka the private global banking cartel and the transnational corporations.[/FONT]
Last edited by a moderator: