Syria....here we go again...

[fathertime]

I don't buy all this 'credibility' crap...reminds me of 8th grade or something...we don't need to establish 'street cred'...we should have been a mostly disinterested 3rd party like the rest of the world...these idiots in syria can figure out their own mess...


I found a link where people can sign a quick petition against the pending syrian attack....here it is  dontattacksyria    DOT COM     I would like to hit the streets in protest as that seems to really have an impact moreso than releasing fury on the internet...although i'm a proponent of both.


Fathertime! 

[bcc_1_2]

I found a link where people can sign a quick petition against the pending syrian attack....

The CWC was in 93... Congress was passing laws in the 1970s... back when Obama was in Kenya lol ... the world community first outlawed mustard gas in 1925... long before Obama was on this planet. Assad crossed a red line that has been around since as early as 1925. We've seen the international community paralyzed before in the face of an evil man...a period of appeasement led to WW2. We had world wars because countries were tied together and they all got drawn in. Similarly Iran is supporting and tied to Syria. While it is silly to compare the power of Germany and their axis of evil to Syria and Iran... we can say the world is a lot smaller now... and a lot more dangerous with nukes and chemical weapons.
Obama has the challenge of explaining how this isn't Iraq. Because if he needs to secure chemical weapons he'll have to send in troops like Iraq. He's claiming weapons of mass destruction... like Iraq... he's claiming ties with Iran... like Iraq.
It's just so strange how Obama has become the war hawk. When I think of those swift boat ads on Kerry and what even members of his own party said about Obama when he ran in 08... I laugh seeing Obama and Kerry beat the war drum... talk about turning the tables.
When it comes to being a Commander in Chief... It's pretty impressive what Obama has done. He called his shot against the dems in the primary and then against McCain in the general.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZDSJN7mVPo
After Kerry beat the war drum Assad has been pretty quiet and reserved. Assad is evil and the rebels have plenty of radicals. This is a no win for the US and our allies in the region. I suspect Obama is plotting a way to get his hands on those weapons. In my view he sure seems to have created plenty of fear and confusion inside the borders of Syria... which is just fine by me.
It's 98% percent of the world's red-line... and they are a bunch of pussies afraid to enforce it. Plus I wouldn't sign that petition for two reasons. First if Obama can secure the chemical weapons that'd be the best possible outcome. That and the ties between Syria and Iran are real... unlike what was sold for the Iraq war. The real issue is Iran's nuclear program. If Obama can get Assad's head on a stick while securing the chemical weapons... it basically let's Iran know we are prepared to cut off their balls... and when you are dealing with a theocracy (radical religious nuts)... they need that type of reinforcement... no nuts... then what good are 72 virgins?
 

[fathertime]

The CWC was in 93... Congress was passing laws in the 1970s... back when Obama was in Kenya lol ... the world community first outlawed mustard gas in 1925... long before Obama was on this planet. Assad crossed a red line that has been around since as early as 1925. We've seen the international community paralyzed before in the face of an evil man...a period of appeasement led to WW2. We had world wars because countries were tied together and they all got drawn in. Similarly Iran is supporting and tied to Syria. While it is silly to compare the power of Germany and their axis of evil to Syria and Iran... we can say the world is a lot smaller now... and a lot more dangerous with nukes and chemical weapons.
Obama has the challenge of explaining how this isn't Iraq. Because if he needs to secure chemical weapons he'll have to send in troops like Iraq. He's claiming weapons of mass destruction... like Iraq... he's claiming ties with Iran... like Iraq.
It's just so strange how Obama has become the war hawk. When I think of those swift boat ads on Kerry and what even members of his own party said about Obama when he ran in 08... I laugh seeing Obama and Kerry beat the war drum... talk about turning the tables.
When it comes to being a Commander in Chief... It's pretty impressive what Obama has done. He called his shot against the dems in the primary and then against McCain in the general.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZDSJN7mVPo
After Kerry beat the war drum Assad has been pretty quiet and reserved. Assad is evil and the rebels have plenty of radicals. This is a no win for the US and our allies in the region. I suspect Obama is plotting a way to get his hands on those weapons. In my view he sure seems to have created plenty of fear and confusion inside the borders of Syria... which is just fine by me.
It's 98% percent of the world's red-line... and they are a bunch of pussies afraid to enforce it. Plus I wouldn't sign that petition for two reasons. First if Obama can secure the chemical weapons that'd be the best possible outcome. That and the ties between Syria and Iran are real... unlike what was sold for the Iraq war. The real issue is Iran's nuclear program. If Obama can get Assad's head on a stick while securing the chemical weapons... it basically let's Iran know we are prepared to cut off their balls... and when you are dealing with a theocracy (radical religious nuts)... they need that type of reinforcement... no nuts... then what good are 72 virgins?

It is intentionally disingenuous for you to bring up Nazis and world war II..that is apples to oranges…the Jews were killed in various countries, in huge numbers, and were victims of genocide.  The Syrians are killing each other within the confines of their own borders during a genuine civil war, and people are free to flee to neighboring countries.
  It wasn’t too long ago that we turned a blind eye to Saddam gassing 10’s of 1000’s…so us suddenly being ‘appalled’ at the use of these weapons now has more to do with regional strategy than anything else…in addition, if I had to, I think I could make a pretty good case for use of chemical weapons.  It would go something like the case of using nuclear weapons in WWII..which we were not opposed to. 
When Obozo was trying to get reelected he made his ‘red line and calculus’ statement…just to appear strong on foreign policy…the general public both here and abroad doesn’t want involvement…in addition many Syrians that have fled to our country and others  also are speaking out AGAINST  interference by the USA…if we go in there and decide who wins THEIR civil war there will be a new large group of people that will want to suicide bomb us as we will be DIRECTLY responsible for the deaths of many when the ‘rebels’ take over…life is pretty good here in the USA…there is no threat to us, just leave it alone..just another stupid war in an armpit of the world. Our intervention only enables the ‘rebel’ side to commit atrocities on the minority groups and if this has to happen then I would rather it be the islamists that get toasted with us out of the picture doing our own thing just like most of the world,
We have all sorts of things to spend money here on, unfunded pensions, programs for children with autism, technology exploration, and numerous large capital improvement projects…the polls continue to show that the public doesn’t want  us to meddle…the rest of the world is sick of us poking our nose in everything and everybody’s business.  If we wanted to weigh in on the Syrian civil war, that is fine, but to be the determining factor in who wins is not something most of the world wants, I’m certain this will come back to haunt us and I don’t see enough reason to involve ourselves.


Fathertime!   

[JWR]

Before we even consider any more military action, the country needs to spend money on all the Iraq/Afgan war veterans that need all sorts of financial, and medical assistance.  We send all these guys to the meat grinder, then the Govt. turns their back on them after they are wounded in so many ways.  Taking care of these heros is going to cost a fortune, and they need to come 1st before all these other wasteful programs.  Over 300 days of waiting for disabled war vets to get evaluated and start recieving financial assistance.  It's pathetic how we are treating these guys.
 
Bombing Syria needs to be the "red line" for the American people, and we need to stand up and start making demands from our Govt.  The vast majority of Americans do not want to get involved, and if Obummer goes ahead and bombs, then we truly have sunk to a new disgusting low.  Our democracy is already tenuous and weak as it is, and bombing without the American people's support would just be more evidence that we have more of a "king" then a president.
 
Hundreds of thousands were killed during our own civil war.  All sorts of atrocities were committed toward innocent civilians during our own civil war.
 
 
 

It is intentionally disingenuous for you to bring up Nazis and world war II..that is apples to oranges…the Jews were killed in various countries, in huge numbers, and were victims of genocide.  The Syrians are killing each other within the confines of their own borders during a genuine civil war, and people are free to flee to neighboring countries.
  It wasn’t too long ago that we turned a blind eye to Saddam gassing 10’s of 1000’s…so us suddenly being ‘appalled’ at the use of these weapons now has more to do with regional strategy than anything else…in addition, if I had to, I think I could make a pretty good case for use of chemical weapons.  It would go something like the case of using nuclear weapons in WWII..which we were not opposed to. 
When Obozo was trying to get reelected he made his ‘red line and calculus’ statement…just to appear strong on foreign policy…the general public both here and abroad doesn’t want involvement…in addition many Syrians that have fled to our country and others  also are speaking out AGAINST  interference by the USA…if we go in there and decide who wins THEIR civil war there will be a new large group of people that will want to suicide bomb us as we will be DIRECTLY responsible for the deaths of many when the ‘rebels’ take over…life is pretty good here in the USA…there is no threat to us, just leave it alone..just another stupid war in an armpit of the world. Our intervention only enables the ‘rebel’ side to commit atrocities on the minority groups and if this has to happen then I would rather it be the islamists that get toasted with us out of the picture doing our own thing just like most of the world,
We have all sorts of things to spend money here on, unfunded pensions, programs for children with autism, technology exploration, and numerous large capital improvement projects…the polls continue to show that the public doesn’t want  us to meddle…the rest of the world is sick of us poking our nose in everything and everybody’s business.  If we wanted to weigh in on the Syrian civil war, that is fine, but to be the determining factor in who wins is not something most of the world wants, I’m certain this will come back to haunt us and I don’t see enough reason to involve ourselves.


Fathertime!

[bcc_1_2]

It is intentionally disingenuous for you to bring up Nazis and world war II..that is apples to oranges

Of course all wars are different. Yet it is completely fine to compare and contrast. That's what history provides us.

It wasn’t too long ago that we turned a blind eye to Saddam gassing 10’s of 1000’s…

In the 80s the US government picked Iraq and Saddam was doing it against Iranian troops. The CIA knew about it at the time. The general public did not. Shootings are appalling.. but when it happens to elementary students... that really pisses people off. I can imagine folks getting a lot more angry when the gas is used on kids.
 

When Obozo was trying to get reelected he made his ‘red line and calculus’ statement…just to appear strong on foreign policy…the general public both here and abroad doesn’t want involvement…

Your statement about what the general public wants is probably correct. I've already showcased how the red-line policy was around before Obama was even alive. You can say he agrees with the red-line... but you can't suggest he created it. Not unless he was in congress in 1993... and even alive in 1925.
 

We have all sorts of things to spend money here on, unfunded pensions, programs for children with autism, technology exploration, and numerous large capital improvement projects…the polls continue to show that the public doesn’t want  us to meddle…the rest of the world is sick of us poking our nose in everything and everybody’s business.  If we wanted to weigh in on the Syrian civil war, that is fine, but to be the determining factor in who wins is not something most of the world wants, I’m certain this will come back to haunt us and I don’t see enough reason to involve ourselves.

Fathertime!

You and Dennis Kucinich ought to have a tea party and rally for the cause. Obama and Kerry have become the war hawks. If you can't see the irony then you are blind. I can see Hillary Clinton's campaign strategy coming together right now... she's going to swift boat the republican nominee.

[fathertime]

 Your statement about what the general public wants is probably correct. I've already showcased how the red-line policy was around before Obama was even alive

YOU have ‘showcased’ the ‘red line’?  lol  Yeah Kerry and Obozo are morphing into warhawks and yeah it seems hypocritical and ironic...but I don't care about the politics right now.   

  Shootings are appalling.. but when it happens to elementary students... that really pisses people off. I can imagine folks getting a lot more angry when the gas is used on kids.
 
 

Obviously nobody likes to see this, but that doesn’t mean we are compelled to act with missile strikes…not only are the American people tired of all the meddling…the rest of the world is turning against us because of it…and I don’t blame them. ..even normally neutral countries like Brazil and Mexico are angry because of constant spying and meddling… instead of moralizing wouldn’t it just be better if we minded our our own business…we have plenty of pressing issues here at home without almost certainly starting a larger conflict with a world that is NOT on our side…we are spreading ourselves thin for reasons not pertaining to our national security.

   I can see Hillary Clinton's campaign strategy coming together right now... she's going to swift boat the republican nominee.

I don’t think the American people  care much about the politics  of the issue…what Hillary Clinton may or may not do in a couple years is not relevant to me and is a silly distraction.


Fathertime!   

[bcc_1_2]

.I don’t think the American people  care much about the politics  of the issue…what Hillary Clinton may or may not do in a couple years is not relevant to me and is a silly distraction.

History tells us you're wrong. Anyone that follows politics will tell you that Bush was pushed over the top of Kerry through the swift boat ads at the very end of the campaign. So basically it was Vietnam that came back to bite him in the butt... and that was way more than just a couple years ago... it was relevant to the point that it was an election decider.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngjUkPbGwAg Swift Boat Ad on now War Hawk Kerry
So when I suggest that Hillary Clinton will use this vote for political purposes (successfully) this should not be a shock. She could end up having the ammo to make GOP candidates look weak on biological weapons, nukes, and Iran. A couple years is a lifetime in politics... it will be the political groups that align with Clinton (not Clinton herself) that hammers this point later on.
Oh the irony... in the next election many republicans will be called weak on defense, weak on Iran, weak on nukes, weak on bio weapons. It will be entertaining... and I'm surprised that nobody sees this is a political move by the President. I can just see Obama and Kerry chuckling in the oval office on this one as they've essentially created a rival party full of Jimmy Carters.

[fathertime]

History tells us you're wrong. Anyone that follows politics will tell you that Bush was pushed over the top of Kerry through the swift boat ads at the very end of the campaign. So basically it was Vietnam that came back to bite him in the butt... and that was way more than just a couple years ago... it was relevant to the point that it was an election decider.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngjUkPbGwAg Swift Boat Ad on now War Hawk Kerry
So when I suggest that Hillary Clinton will use this vote for political purposes (successfully) this should not be a shock. She could end up having the ammo to make GOP candidates look weak on biological weapons, nukes, and Iran. A couple years is a lifetime in politics... it will be the political groups that align with Clinton (not Clinton herself) that hammers this point later on.
Oh the irony... in the next election many republicans will be called weak on defense, weak on Iran, weak on nukes, weak on bio weapons. It will be entertaining... and I'm surprised that nobody sees this is a political move by the President. I can just see Obama and Kerry chuckling in the oval office on this one as they've essentially created a rival party full of Jimmy Carters.

History says many things some of which contradict each other, but that might be complicated for you.
 
  You have turned this into a stupid discussion.  We were discussing the looming attack on Syria and you want to talk about ‘Hilliary’ and what YOU THINK is going to happen at the next presidential election.  RIGHT NOW, it isn’t important how democrats or republicans are viewed in 3 years.  Your ‘assessment’ about it being ‘weak’ or being ‘strong’ is not important…the issue is what business is this war of ours?  I’m not concerned about the political fallout years later.  It is obvious we could wipe out Syria in a day if we decided to do that.  The rest of the world sees us as being overbearing, and they are correct.  In addition, we have overwhelming domestic issues to attend to yet our 'representatives' think they have more important uses for our tax dollars. 


Fathertime! 

[V_Man]

Before we even consider any more military action, the country needs to spend money on all the Iraq/Afgan war veterans that need all sorts of financial, and medical assistance.  We send all these guys to the meat grinder, then the Govt. turns their back on them after they are wounded in so many ways.  Taking care of these heros is going to cost a fortune, and they need to come 1st before all these other wasteful programs.  Over 300 days of waiting for disabled war vets to get evaluated and start recieving financial assistance.  It's pathetic how we are treating these guys.
 
Bombing Syria needs to be the "red line" for the American people, and we need to stand up and start making demands from our Govt.  The vast majority of Americans do not want to get involved, and if Obummer goes ahead and bombs, then we truly have sunk to a new disgusting low.  Our democracy is already tenuous and weak as it is, and bombing without the American people's support would just be more evidence that we have more of a "king" then a president.
 
Hundreds of thousands were killed during our own civil war.  All sorts of atrocities were committed toward innocent civilians during our own civil war.

I am not American but I agree with this completely.
Australia is one of about 3 countries that still follow the USA more or less blindly in foriegn policy. I.E. with boots on the ground. We just had an election here so things have shifted to the center right. In other words, as likely as ever to follow the USA into a counter productive meddling in other countries business. This in turn makes it less safe for me to travel.
I can just see how it will go. Australia will leap in to join big cousin USA, deploying some special forces to identify targets. USA will use this help, not because they need it, but because they want to make it look like an international action. Someone will get killed for doing something that was no business of Australia and certainly not in our national interest.
Months later, boat loads of refugees from Syria will start arriving off Australian shores and these refugees will be a huge polictical football. The government will try to turn the boats back. Back to a country they just helped bomb.
It's loose-loose-loose all the way.
Plus I am not at all convinced that at the end of the day, anyone will really be deterred from using chemical weapons in the future just because the USA bombed yet another country. I think, long term, it is just as likely to increase the risk of use of chemical weapons in the future.

[bcc_1_2]

If you look up the list of countries we've bombed since WW2 it is pretty damn long. We are having this debate on Syria because the President hasn't just gone ahead and droned them like he has several other countries. Have you stopped long enough to think why? Sure you can have a debate about bombing Syria... but that is only because the President hasn't bombed them already... and that has everything to do with politics. Shrewd politics in my opinion.
Just keep in mind you are only having this debate right now over bombing Syria... because Obama wants you to have it.

[fathertime]

If you look up the list of countries we've bombed since WW2 it is pretty damn long. We are having this debate on Syria because the President hasn't just gone ahead and droned them like he has several other countries. Have you stopped long enough to think why? Sure you can have a debate about bombing Syria... but that is only because the President hasn't bombed them already... and that has everything to do with politics. Shrewd politics in my opinion.
Just keep in mind you are only having this debate right now over bombing Syria... because Obama wants you to have it.

B CC, you must be living in a padded room of your own creation if you think that Obozo is in control of this situation…this is NOT a big political game he controls...As of now, we haven’t ‘droned’ Syria because for one, if we did the outcry from the international community would be coming from every direction…there would also be an outcry here in the states…You really are making ignorant statements…we have no authority to go ‘droning’ wherever we want without consequences…we don’t own this world, and we should be minding our own business and problems just like the American people want…there are many more detriments than benefits from interfering in this stupid religious civil war…if our ‘representatives’ continue to defy the American people on issues like this our problems will multiply on the home front and maybe one day it could be us that start getting ‘droned’   

Fathertime! 

[fathertime]

If you look up the list of countries we've bombed since WW2 it is pretty damn long. We are having this debate on Syria because the President hasn't just gone ahead and droned them like he has several other countries. Have you stopped long enough to think why? Sure you can have a debate about bombing Syria... but that is only because the President hasn't bombed them already... and that has everything to do with politics. Shrewd politics in my opinion.
Just keep in mind you are only having this debate right now over bombing Syria... because Obama wants you to have it.

font on last post got all screwed up...here is a copy
B CC, you must be living in a padded room of your own creation if you think that Obozo is in control of this situation…this is NOT a big political game he controls...As of now, we haven’t ‘droned’ Syria because for one, if we did the outcry from the international community would be coming from every direction…there would also be an outcry here in the states…You really are making ignorant statements…we have no authority to go ‘droning’ wherever we want without consequences…we don’t own this world, and we should be minding our own business and problems just like the American people want…there are many more detriments than benefits from interfering in this stupid religious civil war…if our ‘representatives’ continue to defy the American people on issues like this our problems will multiply on the home front and maybe one day it could be us that start getting ‘droned’   
 
Fathertime!

[Ray]

  You have turned this into a stupid discussion.  We were discussing the looming attack on Syria and you want to talk about ‘Hilliary’...
 

Hey, that's what liberals do. When they are losing the argument, they try to change the subject to direct attention away from their stupidity.
 
 

 
 
So let's see now...the only ones who are backing up Obozo's lies that it isn't his red line are: Kerry, Pelosi, the leftist butt-lickers at MSNBC, and bcc. It figures.
 
But of course the rest of the world knows better.
 
 
 
 

[bcc_1_2]

So let's see now...the only ones who are backing up Obozo's lies that it isn't his red line are: Kerry, Pelosi, the leftist butt-lickers at MSNBC, and bcc. It figures.
 
But of course the rest of the world knows better.
 

And John McCain and several republicans. Seems pretty simple to me, Assad gives up his chemical weapons or he gets [snip]ed up. Pretty sure the liberal argument isn't drone bomb Syria.

Chemical Weapons Convention- 1993
The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) is an arms control agreement which outlaws the production, stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons and their precursors. Its full name is the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction. The agreement is administered by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which is an independent organization based in the Hague, in the Netherlands.
The main obligation under the convention is the prohibition of use and production of chemical weapons, as well as the destruction of all chemical weapons. The destruction activities are verified by the OPCW. As of January 2013, around 78% of the (declared) stockpile of chemical weapons has thus been destroyed.^[5][6] The convention also has provisions for systematic evaluation of chemical and military plants, as well as for investigations of allegations of use and production of chemical weapons based on intelligence of other state parties.
As of June 2013, 189 states are party to the CWC, and another two countries (Israel and Myanmar) have signed but not yet ratified the convention.

[Researcher]

What is surprising to me is how apathetic the international community has become. I figured there would have been more hoopla over the use of chemical weapons but I guess all these other countries have problems of their own keeping them occupied. Of course so does the US but it seems the policy of this administration is to ignore the problems and hope they will go away.

[Ray]

 
News Flash: Now Kerry says any military action undertaken in Syria would be “unbelievably small.”
 
ROTFLMGDAO!
 
Yes folks, it will be so small that nobody will even know it happened, especially the Syrians. Perhaps we will fly over in an F-117 and shoot a rubber band at Assad...or maybe drop a marshmallow on his house?
 
Obama and his hacks sure do know how to scare the bejesus out of our enemies... Unbelievable!
 
I think Putin bitch-slapped Obama in Moscow and scared the hell out of that little wimp... LOL!
 
Yes, Obama has made us the laughing stock of the world...
 
 
Ray
 
 

[Researcher]

You would think since Obama won a Nobel Peace Prize the situation in Syria would be a piece of cake for him....LOL!

[JWR]

Assad has to go.  But in a different way.  A little patience, and the right time, and kaboom.  Only way to deal with this is we have to go after him quietly. 

[Researcher]

It looks like Putin is going to come to Obama's rescue and get him out of this pickle by pretending to take away Syria's chemical weapons. What a bunch of weasels.

[V_Man]

Just keep in mind you are only having this debate right now over bombing Syria... because Obama wants you to have it.

I don't know about the USA but I can guarantee you that the rest of the world would have a 'debate' on this no matter what any US president might want. Just like always.

[bcc_1_2]

I don't know about the USA but I can guarantee you that the rest of the world would have a 'debate' on this no matter what any US president might want. Just like always.

There is a pretty big difference between debating if the US should bomb versus if it was a good idea for the US to bomb. Either Syria is trying to stall or Assad has decided giving up the weapons is the most prudent thing to do. Whatever Obama does ... doesn't seem to be good enough... kill Osama... get criticized... have Nato go into Libya... criticized... potentially get Assad to give up chemical weapons... more criticism. When it comes to his Commander in Chief role... Obama wears the hat well... no matter how much you don't like his health care law... or his immigration plan... he's a much better Commander in Chief than we had before.
He has the challenge of dealing with a Syrian government that is not our ally. Rebels that are in some cases extremists... having the mistake of Iraq hanging over the head of this country... all that considered I have no complaints about how he's handled this. I'm not rooting for Assad or the rebels. I'm rooting for the extraction of chemical weapons. Even if Obama just gets most of the weapons... they are far less likely to fall into the hands of people that will use them on us or our allies. That's why it is reasonable to assume that Russia might not just be playing games with this... because they are worried about it being used by separatists against Russia. They want these weapons contained now too. 

[JWR]

They should go after the companies that are making the weapons too.  Whoever is profiting from selling these needs to be locked up.  Assad and his cronies needs to be charged with war crimes.

[bcc_1_2]

They should go after the companies that are making the weapons too.  Whoever is profiting from selling these needs to be locked up.  Assad and his cronies needs to be charged with war crimes.

As late as 2012 British companies sold chemicals to Syria that could be used for warfare. There is no easy answer or simple solution. Assad used chemical weapons on children... and while the rest of the world that signed on to the agreement stood around like pussies... ole liberal Obama applied the pressure with his war hawk John Kerry.

[Bob_S]

It looks like Putin is going to come to Obama's rescue and get him out of this pickle by pretending to take away Syria's chemical weapons. What a bunch of weasels.

If you listen to The Dark Secret Place (podcasts), you would have seen this coming weeks ago.  No surprise.

[fathertime]

For our 'representatives' to be politicizing or selling of the Russian solution is polarizing and unnecessary. 


I don't think obozo deserves much credit or blame for the war in Syria.


The objective of forcing regime change has not been met...and I continue to believe that we should remain on the sidelines and stop telling the world what to do...I think this whole event has created many more detractors than fans of the USA...


I'm delighted our excuse for intervening has been taken from us...we have painted ourselves into a corner now...until we concoct another excuse to involve ourselves..but it appears the american people WILL NOT get behind us intervening Assad has many supporters within his country which is one reason why he hasn't been overthrown...To those that say he has killed 100k of his own people that is just double talk...It is a civil war and they are killing and decapitating each other...The different sides hate each other...but none of this is OUR problem.


Overall I say hats off to the American people on this one...WE were opinionated and vocal and I'd like to think that stalled obozo from giving in to the pressure and unilaterally start bomb...which bought enough time for Kerry to mis-speak and Russia to facilitate what may be a partial solution keeping us out of it...


Congress approval should rise because they were prepared to vote the way they their constitutes wanted.


Fathertime!