President Obama to Address the Nation on Syria

Originally posted by jimmyx
so if he doesn't do anything.....how many people could Assad kill with gas that would be acceptable to you?....1,000 more?, 10,000 more? how about 100,000 people? would you say that it isn't our problem, it's their's

1 - It's not our problem.

2 - Qatar and Saudi Arabia and The Muslim Brotherhood (and Egypt for that matter) are already in proxy wars there. Let them deal with it.

3 - This has nothing to do with the US or our national security or the national security of our allies.

4 - I find it interesting that the far left thinks it's okay for Obama to go into Syria because chemical weapons killed 1500 people ... but those same people on the far left massively protested when Bush wanted to go into Iraq when Saddam killed MILLIONS OF PEOPLE. Some are hugg'n that ol' (D) ... pretty wild.

reply to post by jimmyx


Assad isn't the one using gas. The rebels arw.. and trust me if the rebels take the counrry thw people will be much worse off than under Assad. The rebels will continue massacring the pro Assad Syrians. Oh and they will probably keep using gas especially when they get Assads stockpiles. The UN already said the rebela used gas once and they couldn't determine who used it in the most recent attack.

reply to post by Dianec


I believe beyond any shadow of doubt, that this is another one of his political parlor tricks. Of course he will go up to the podium and make a great speech. He has done it on numerous occasions. With that said, most of his speeches are nothing more than empty words and rhetoric. In other words, the rubber never seems to hit the road on anything.

My gut tells me this will be another occasion of that phenomena. With regards to this hotbutton issue, he spoke too soon, and now his foot is in his mouth. This Congressional Authorization idea is nothing more than a means to throw this nightmare into their lap, and whether they yay or nay is immaterial. It will be another reason for him to play the blame game, and walk away.

The situation does not turn out well in Syria after said military action? It is Congress, because they voted for it. They vote no, and it will be Congress' fault that Syrians are dying by the bundle because of their personal differences with the President. He does not want to be held accountable or bear responsibility for anything.

This situation has found him being the odd man out, because he spoke before gaining assurances by allies that they would support taking military action in Syria. Now the toothpaste is out of the tube, and he can't find a way to put it back in. As stated in my earlier post, the international community is watching and waiting. His words on international affairs invoke the credibility of the United States. Speaking out of turn can have consequences. He is going to have to take action, but if the Congressional Authorization idea works as I think he intends? It will lesson the blow to him personally, and will offer an opportunity to blame others instead of himself.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by jimmyx
so if he doesn't do anything.....how many people could Assad kill with gas that would be acceptable to you?....1,000 more?, 10,000 more? how about 100,000 people? would you say that it isn't our problem, it's their's

1 - It's not our problem.

2 - Qatar and Saudi Arabia and The Muslim Brotherhood (and Egypt for that matter) are already in proxy wars there. Let them deal with it.

3 - This has nothing to do with the US or our national security or the national security of our allies.

4 - I find it interesting that the far left thinks it's okay for Obama to go into Syria because chemical weapons killed 1500 people ... but those same people on the far left massively protested when Bush wanted to go into Iraq when Saddam killed MILLIONS OF PEOPLE. Some are hugg'n that ol' (D) ... pretty wild.

there are "far left" people as you call them that do not want to go into Syria and bomb, and there are people on the far right that do want to go in and bomb. I don't know why you think this is a left or right issue, you are trying to create a divide where there isn't any.

Originally posted by jimmyx
I don't know why you think this is a left or right issue, you are trying to create a divide where there isn't any.

I"m making note that many people here who are fired up to go and 'help' the people who were gassed, are doing so when there were 'only' 1500 people gassed. These same people marched by the hundreds of thousands against going into Iraq when MILLIONS of people were murdered by Saddam. It's rather comical .. in a sad way.

So .. Obama addressed the nation on Syria. Something he forgot to mention ...
ATS Thread - Syria - It's all about religion and oil pipelines
He forgot to mention that what is happening in Syria is all about geo-political posturing for oil/gas pipelines, and that the killing is in large part also because Muslims think other Muslims aren't being the right kind of Muslim. However, I noticed that he managed to lie over and over about bombing Syria being in Americas national security interests. :shk:

reply to post by FlyersFan


so, we stay away no matter how many thousands, or tens of thousands are gassed? that seems to be your line of deduction.

Originally posted by jimmyx
so, we stay away no matter how many thousands, or tens of thousands are gassed? that seems to be your line of deduction.

Yes.

It was the deduction of those on the left for Iraq.
Millions were murdered .. but we should have stayed out of it according to them.
Seems to fit even better for Syria.

reply to post by jimmyx


I cannot speak for Flyersfan, but they have to be honest if they send people to war, not just draw their conclusion based on their assumption and point the vinger to Assad as the guilty one.
Let them come with undeniable evidence to back up their claims, or shut up and don't put lives in danger by attacking yet another country.

Pretty fair don't you think?

Originally posted by jimmyx
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

so, we stay away no matter how many thousands, or tens of thousands are gassed? that seems to be your line of deduction.

edit on 1-9-2013 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)

The only reason Chemical weapons have been used is because that is what Omama have put as a red line to take action.

Some of these rebles are Saudi Arabian Mercenaries. Saudi Arbia is lobbying hard do make the US take action, and for Russia to back of. Saudi Arabia have the Resources to give their Mercenaries Chemical weapons.

Originally posted by spy66
Saudi Arbia is lobbying hard do make the US take action, and for Russia to back of.

Saudi Arabia has been in a proxy war in Syria for years. It's been pumping millions and millions of $$ into the war there to try to oust Assad. It's all about oil and gas pipelines.

reply to post by FlyersFan


you don't see any difference in the 2 conflicts...by the way, after the Kurds in northern Iraq were gassed, we went in and created a no fly zone. look, I tend to be on your side, I simply don't trust the intelligence community anymore, and if the UN, along with other world powers don't give a damn, why should we? the problem I have with it, is that it will become an acceptable weapon of war in any future conflicts.

When will be the congress vote be on Syria ?

Originally posted by jimmyx
you don't see any difference in the 2 conflicts...

Sure .. some differences ...

Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran, Muslim Brotherhood .. all have been having proxy wars in Syria for years. It's been a war zone for a very long time. It's all about oil pipelines and religion.

Syria isn't even remotely a threat to our national security - a threat to Israel, and it's leadership is obnoxious - but not a threat to us or our interests.

Taking out the leadership in Syria will just put the Muslim Brotherhood in place. And they would be worse.

Iraq was a threat to our allies and there weren't a bunch of proxy wars already going on in the country. Taking out Saddam doesn't put something worse in place. Millions were murdered in Iraq, as opposed to 1500 in Syria by chemical attack and we don't even know who pulled off the attack.

I see big differences between the two.

Originally posted by jimmyx
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

so, we stay away no matter how many thousands, or tens of thousands are gassed? that seems to be your line of deduction.

edit on 1-9-2013 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)

So not knowing who is doing the gassing, the US should just go in and start blowing everything up?

How about the countries of that region step up to the plate and do something. The west is TIRED of the middle east. Isreal, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria - leave their affairs to themselves. Not our business.

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by butcherguy

 

So would you rather he didn't go to Congress and just started bombing Syria last night?

No, I think he should have went to Congress first.... if he wanted to avoid looking like he had painted himself into a corner.
I say stay out of Syria altogether at this point.

so if he doesn't do anything.....how many people could Assad kill with gas that would be acceptable to you?....1,000 more?, 10,000 more? how about 100,000 people? would you say that it isn't our problem, it's their's

I wonder about all the other places where millions are being killed. North Korea and Darfur for starters. You want blow those countries up also? Or are you just a die hard Obama supporter?

There are alot of problems here. No one knows what the scale of u.s. attacks will be, or what response they will trigger. If the attacks dont shift the balance in the civil war then what is the point? You can only massacre with conventional bombs? And if they do, then presumably you have alqaeda filling some of the power vacume. Not to mention the christian and alawite communities becoming more exposed to extremists.
Perhaps destroying assads airforce could be justified as a humanitarian intervention.
Well the world is on a razors edge until u.s. politicians finish their vacations and get around to voting on the fate of the middle east.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by spy66
Saudi Arbia is lobbying hard do make the US take action, and for Russia to back of.

Saudi Arabia has been in a proxy war in Syria for years. It's been pumping millions and millions of $$ into the war there to try to oust Assad. It's all about oil and gas pipelines.

There are more than just oil and piplines they are fighting for. The US is playing a much higher game With a lot bigger stake. The US is fighting for world political Power. They are trying to force Democracy on every nation bit by bit.

I like the way Alpert Pike said it: We will create: A atheistic Democracy, Zionism, Nazisim, Islam, Kommunisme and than we will make them wage WARs against eachother, so that we can get rid of all these fractions.

Pike Also said that we must make one of the nations stronger than all the others. It ended up to be the US. The atheistic Democracy.

Nazism is already dead and barried.

It might not have been Alber Pike who actually wrote these Things, but who ever it was. He is right on the Money.

Western media does not show interviews of "normal" Syrian people.
The normal Syrian people say that 99% of the FSA are not even Syrian....But foreign backed fighters....

reply to post by spy66

Originally posted by spy66
The US is fighting for world political Power. They are trying to force Democracy on every nation bit by bit.

This has got absolutely NOTHING to do with democracy and the US...

Look beyond the curtain at who is really pulling the strings and WHY.

Most wars are engineered by the Illuminati to weaken civilization and create a global police state, the "New World Order." Does a Satanic Cult Rule the World?

War is the major way for the EVIL, sinister, insane Illuminati to control humanity. Source

“...this Cabal of Evil has engineered all major conflicts to further their agenda for the total and absolute subjugation of humanity. Source