It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Scott Walker: We might have to take military action on Day One

page: 2
30
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Calm down my freind.

No ones makeing excuses for Obama.

He has conducted some very wrong military strikes.

No excuses made for him and if god exists I hope he is judged for them along with other presidents.


As for Iran? Military action was not a option.

Its not really just obama, UK,France and germany put the breaks on there. If the USA 3 biggest economic and military allies say no its options are limited. Look how much trouble Iraq has been with just the UK ? Without any international support the US would have a very tough time.



If we are wrong then we should get the blame. But I hope we give diplonacy a chance.
If it fails and Iran renages on there deal? We can talk military action.
edit on 20-7-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

The only plus side I see is that Walker will be allowed to blame all his actions on Obama.

I mean, that's how it works, right?



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:42 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer


Look, I see everyone and their cousins making excuses for Obama and his obscene use of drones.


Nobody here has been making excuses for Obama and his use of drones in the middle east.

Regardless, the government continues to use those drones in nations like Pakistan and Afghanistan because their governments allow them to be operated within their borders. So no, it's not the same as waging war against Iran.

Need I remind you as well, the use of drones is backed by both Republicans and Democrats. More so by Republicans. It's not going anywhere, regardless of who gets elected next. My question is, will your evident display disgust of their use continue on if somebody like Walker gets elected in?


To discuss what to do about Iran is about as useful as discussing what fire alarms to buy when your house in engulfed with flames.


So in translation, life fire alarms are useless to a house already burning down, this diplomatic agreement is useless. So what? War is already going to happen? So should the US be dragged into this war? Should we attack then? I suppose you agree with Walker, no? Since this is what you believe.



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: crazyewok

The only plus side I see is that Walker will be allowed to blame all his actions on Obama.

I mean, that's how it works, right?



I think EACH president should be acountble for there own actions.

If one plays the blame game nothing gets fixed.


Only presidents post WW2 I think that understood that were Einsenhower and JFK. They cetainly had blood on there hands too but at least manned up to it.



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:45 PM
link   
To be sure, he could have phrased that a bit differently...

Perhaps like this?


To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace.

George Washington


Read more at www.brainyquote.com...


But if the United States can finally after fifty plus years bury the hatchet with Cuba, can the same not be done with Iran?

The hatchets have long since been buried with Japan, Germany, and Italy, can the same not be done with Iran?

Vietnam is in the process of becoming an ally, can the same not be done with Iran?

It can be argued that those five nations certainly did more harm to the U.S. than Iran ever has. Perhaps, especially with the advent of ISIL/ISIS, it's time to, at the very least, consider rapprochement?



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

I don't see what good, war with Iran would do for US interests personally.

But Walker will only blame Obama for any actions he takes.

And for the record?

Obama has bombed;
Afghanistan,
Iraq,
Pakistan,
Somalia,
Yemen,
Libya and Syria with drones.



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: crazyewok

The only plus side I see is that Walker will be allowed to blame all his actions on Obama.

I mean, that's how it works, right?



I think EACH president should be acountble for there own actions.

If one plays the blame game nothing gets fixed.


Only presidents post WW2 I think that understood that were Einsenhower and JFK. They cetainly had blood on there hands too but at least manned up to it.


Oh C'mon!

Everything is/was/will be Bush's fault!

That's how it works now.

It took 7 years of progressives beating that drum for it to finally sink in!



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Southern Guardian

If a Republican gets in office and declares war on Iran, I think I may have to renounce my citizenship because such an action would be a war crime.
Yeah it's not like detaining American citizens indefinitely is a war crime or anything



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: crazyewok

The only plus side I see is that Walker will be allowed to blame all his actions on Obama.

I mean, that's how it works, right?



I think EACH president should be acountble for there own actions.

If one plays the blame game nothing gets fixed.


Only presidents post WW2 I think that understood that were Einsenhower and JFK. They cetainly had blood on there hands too but at least manned up to it.


Oh C'mon!

Everything is/was/will be Bush's fault!

That's how it works now.

It took 7 years of progressives beating that drum for it to finally sink in!



Maybe thats why nothing ever gets fixed in both our countrys?

Cause the current goverment is too busy blameing the past?



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You act like military conflict is solely a republican quality. Obama, Clinton, Johnson, and Kennedy all substantiated wars, and all get a pass in the media for it.



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: crazyewok

The only plus side I see is that Walker will be allowed to blame all his actions on Obama.

I mean, that's how it works, right?



I think EACH president should be acountble for there own actions.

If one plays the blame game nothing gets fixed.


Only presidents post WW2 I think that understood that were Einsenhower and JFK. They cetainly had blood on there hands too but at least manned up to it.


Oh C'mon!

Everything is/was/will be Bush's fault!

That's how it works now.

It took 7 years of progressives beating that drum for it to finally sink in!



Maybe thats why nothing ever gets fixed in both our countrys?

Cause the current goverment is too busy blameing the past?


How many people have been saying that for YEARS!



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:55 PM
link   
The next President will be at war from minute one.

Obama isn't stopping anything so quick is he.

He can do a lot of damage with 18 more months to go !!




posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

I tell you what Beezzer, since you're so eager to talk about how terrible Obama is in a thread about Walker warmongering, let's come to an agreement together.

1. Walker is wrong for wanting war against Iran. Attacking Iran is a terrible alternative to diplomacy.
2. Obama is wrong for his use of drones and the bombing of other nations.
3.Regardless of whether Hillary or Walker or Jeb gets into office, they'll all continue to cycle of bombings we've seen in this administration and the previous one.
4. Each president is responsible for their own actions.

Can we agree to all of the above? Can we continue on now, or are you going to continue with strawman?



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:56 PM
link   
In general the Republican party has degenerated into a pack of fools and the motley crew standing up and competing for leadership roles only reflects that. If Trump, Walker and Cruz didn't have millions of supporters they would vanish in a heartbeat. God bless our democracy as the laughing gas spreads around even more. And wish good luck to the rest of the world as we rattle our swords and actually consider passing the nuclear trigger into the hands of these pompous jerks.



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

And every time bush gets brought up the right goes into a hissy fight. So do they practice what they preach or resort to what they said was wrong to do.

I for one agree with bringing up the previous president, as their admin and it's policies will have some over flow into the next.



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: crazyewok

The only plus side I see is that Walker will be allowed to blame all his actions on Obama.

I mean, that's how it works, right?



I think EACH president should be acountble for there own actions.

If one plays the blame game nothing gets fixed.


Only presidents post WW2 I think that understood that were Einsenhower and JFK. They cetainly had blood on there hands too but at least manned up to it.


Oh C'mon!

Everything is/was/will be Bush's fault!

That's how it works now.

It took 7 years of progressives beating that drum for it to finally sink in!



Maybe thats why nothing ever gets fixed in both our countrys?

Cause the current goverment is too busy blameing the past?


How many people have been saying that for YEARS!



It seems not many as the majoriry of the general public seem to still argue along partasian lines.



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 03:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: beezzer

Nope, and barry shouldn't use them so much either.





When Barry uses them, it's an act of war?


who's barry????......goldwater?...I thought he was dead



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 04:01 PM
link   
I have to wonder just how many of Walkers supporters on this forum (and I'm very sure he has many supporters on this forum) have the spine to actually come out and say they support him waging war on Iran from day one? Without any deflection or strawman, how many of his supporters have the spine to come here and fess up to supporting him? I have to wonder.



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

Well, none of those other countries have recent history of breaking into "Death to America!" chants during political rallies, but your message is not lost on me.



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 04:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: beezzer

I tell you what Beezzer, since you're so eager to talk about how terrible Obama is in a thread about Walker warmongering, let's come to an agreement together.

1. Walker is wrong for wanting war against Iran. Attacking Iran is a terrible alternative to diplomacy.
2. Obama is wrong for his use of drones and the bombing of other nations.
3.Regardless of whether Hillary or Walker or Jeb gets into office, they'll all continue to cycle of bombings we've seen in this administration and the previous one.
4. Each president is responsible for their own actions.

Can we agree to all of the above? Can we continue on now, or are you going to continue with strawman?


How much diplomacy is enough diplomacy? How much is too little, too much?

Yeah, Obama was in the wrong for his use of drones.

Each president is responsible for their own actions. God I love this one. After 7 years, NOW the sitting president is responsible?

No strawman. Unless you're willing to admit that you all used it for years in defending Obama.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join