Should we bomb Syria to save the Syrian children?

Should we help Syria bomb itself?

  • I think more bombs are going to save Syrian children

    Votes: 4 22.2%

  • I think less bombs would be better for the children

    Votes: 14 77.8%
  • Total voters
    18
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
echelon1k1 said:
fourteen nights... :lol: Any play on words was intentional...
Click to expand...
So, is that right? Seriously, I thought it was 12 for some reason. 12 days of Christmas? But, 2 weeks, huh?

Kinda like the French I guess. Have to have their own word everything. :)
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Harrekin said:
So it's "do as I say, not as I do" ?

Typical American response.

Cite evidence it was the Assad regime that launched the chemical weapons btw?
Click to expand...
Hey, we didn't make the rule. We just exempted ourselves and then suspended that.
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
heckler73 said:
Has anyone else seen this yet?
EDIT: This is the source

http://pastebin.com/zeXpsRnh

http://beforeitsnews.com/middle-east/2013/09/hacked-email-of-us-intelligence-colonel-shows-pentagons-involvement-in-chemical-attack-in-syria-2453958.html
Click to expand...
Do you know how easy it is to fake this story and then have it you pass around? All you have to do is get the lie published in some rag.

This is less, far less, that anything on 9/11 kookery. It sinks to the level of Sinking Patreaus in that silly unproven scandal in that honey trap.

I could do this to you. Think about how easy it is to type up an email and take a screen shot. That could be an idea I came up with after some other idiot began lying about hacking this Officer's email.

And even then, it says nothing really at all. Don't be fooled by the peaceniks either.

Chicago against the hippies. Would not be the first time.
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
cough cough .....Waco, Texas....cough cough
Click to expand...
You are microcosmic thinking with a little bit of un-real mixed it.

You are still wide eyed enough to expect perfection in the USA. You will never see the flowers if you only look for dog shit.
 
echelon1k1

echelon1k1

New Member
Doer said:
You are microcosmic thinking with a little bit of un-real mixed it.

You are still wide eyed enough to expect perfection in the USA. You will never see the flowers if you only look for dog shit.
Click to expand...
The white house has some beautiful flowers... ;)

obama-rose-garden.jpg
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
heckler73 said:
I agree, about it not meaning a great deal. After all, it is just a site in the wilderness. For all I know, those screenshots could be an elaborate ruse.

However, I think the angle on this story is misleading. It's not that they helped gas anyone, per se, but they capitalized on the aftermath. That is what those messages are implying (if true) at the minimum.

So, what motive would the US have in fomenting the situation further? That is all I am trying to bring up for discussion; does the US have ulterior motives?
Click to expand...
I am trying to help you here. Seriously, you just need to turn you mind eye around.

It is quite illegal and a hanging offense, for the President to not have ulterior motives. To defend the Constitution. Now, he has said and I agree, having not even voted for him that this is above Politics, but it isn't. Politic is war, and how when and why to conduct it. How can I agree? Ulterior Motives. He is the one to produce this Finding.

No one else. Why? He does what he does, as his interpretation of his Oath... what he said he WILL do. And he does not have to explain it, but we get to dig for it. Good luck.

You act like this is a game. If he told us, even 1/10 of his motive, it would be Treason. And most of your mind meddlers know that.

We cannot but recognize reality, sometimes, and still most will not.
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
I'm curious where the U.S. Constitution authorizes foreign adventures like the one that may unfold in Syria ? Anyone?

How does Syria present a threat to the USA? Are their troops at the borders?

It almost seems like the USA thinks it's the World Police or something.
Click to expand...


I could explain it but you have to promise not to keep asking me again every time you forget. :)
 
JonnyAppleSeed420

JonnyAppleSeed420

New Member
lifegoesonbrah said:
So more bombs better for the children then?
Click to expand...
I'm not quite sure about this children thing? Do you see women and children? I don't. Their society is built on using women and children as pawns, been this way thousands of years. The women and children are pushed out front as human sheilds and the survivors become the next generation of bombers. This has been the cycle since, well eons. You can't break the cycle, it is built right into their fabric of life. Sad to say but they need to learn some valuable lessons and breaking the cycle starts with the children. The children is the key...but There aren't any???Really though!
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Doer said:
You are microcosmic thinking with a little bit of un-real mixed it.

You are still wide eyed enough to expect perfection in the USA. You will never see the flowers if you only look for dog shit.
Click to expand...
As usual, you put your words in others mouths. No, I don't expect perfection, that is impossible since ALL governments that use coercive methods are flawed from the start.

A man beats his wife with a sack of dogshit, then buys her flowers...The flowers are still beautiful, the man is still an asshole. PEACE.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
tear gas is not considered a chemical weapon. it causes no lasting harm (usually) and is not a weapon of war.

shit, in indonesia they use COBRAS ON TEN FOOT POLES to break up unruly protests.

i consider this a viable solution to the "occupy" dipshit problem

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-19058025.html
Click to expand...


Oh I get it, people that get to define the language can make chemical weapons, "not chemical weapons". Just like murdering innocent people, isn't murder, it's "collateral damage".
Boy I gotta get me one of them government wordsmithing machines!
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
tryingtogrow89 said:
The u.s. killed over 500,000 children with sanctions on iraq.
Click to expand...
no. Saddam did that by diverting the shit that was supposed to go to the citizenry to his military machine.

even had there been no sanctions saddam would still feed his army rather than his poeople,, just like the Kims do in North Korea

the only way to eat in a marxist dictatorship is to join the army.

Marxism killed those kids, and theres NO WAY it could have been half a million. in a country of ~20 million that would be NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Oh I get it, people that get to define the language can make chemical weapons, "not chemical weapons". Just like murdering innocent people, isn't murder, it's "collateral damage".
Boy I gotta get me one of them government wordsmithing machines!
Click to expand...
by that reasoning bullets are chemicval weapons,, since lead is on the periodic table and the propellant is a chemical reaction.

i guess Farts are a chemical weapon too.
 
skunkd0c

skunkd0c

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
I'm curious where the U.S. Constitution authorizes foreign adventures like the one that may unfold in Syria ? Anyone?

How does Syria present a threat to the USA? Are their troops at the borders?

It almost seems like the USA thinks it's the World Police or something.
Click to expand...
yep seems that way, unless it's China lol
 
midnitetoak

midnitetoak

Active Member
....and like a fart in the shower there is no escape from WWIII, apparently. Looks like the self serving members of congress will give O the ok to start up a new war. 90 days my ass??!!!!...as soon as China, Russia, Iran, & Hezzbollah get into this after we send off some missiles congress will reconvene to authorize further military actions. This rabbit hole goes pretty deep, yo, who knows where it ends?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top