Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why we SHOULD demand military action on Syria

page: 14
19
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 


Well mike I have seen you post the pic of the robot several times now and it seems you have a big misconception about them. First you may not realize it but they require the operator to be in a certain proximity to them. They are not automatons. Secound they would only be able to determine if certain compounds are present in no way would they be able to give enough information to trace where they originated. That requires boots on the ground an a lab. Third would be battery life there would only be so much time it could remain operational before stoping all together. Fourth would be recovery unless you want to leave classified technology in such a region for those who are not our allies to recover. It all comes back to the fact that what you are asking for would require the physical presence of the US on the ground there.


Must have missed this comment from page 3
the precursor that lead up to the bot.

============ repost ==================
You are still thinking about this
as a passive consumer and by-product of government,
and not as the source of all authority and legitimacy in our government.

Demanding action on this = taking possession of our Country again.


Demanding that we land a rover in Syria is trivial in comparison.
Don't we already have the tech to do this on mars?
Is Syria really _that_ far away.
============ end repost ==============


I mean wake the hell up people.

We should Demand action,
specific action,
with the results that we want.


Mike




posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Don't shadow box with ghosts and specters of where our road is leading.


Tell your mind that the road will go exactly where you insist it does
and then make that happen.

We can do anything,
and we can do it exactly the way we want it done.



We shouldn't just _demand_ action,
we should tell them _how_ we want it done.

Tell NASA to get off of one of their rovers,
we need it to land in Syria and do some tests.

Something, anything.



Quit waiting for someone to invent the gorram solution.


We are the solution,
the moment has come for us to start thinking inventively again.
Like owners,
with a future,
a sense of purpose,
and unconquerable creativity.



IT WAS A GODDAMN CHEMICAL ATTACK PEOPLE,
I don't trust anyone else to own the solution on this.
We should be the one's leading the way.!


Mike
edit on 2-9-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikegrouchy

You are still thinking about this
as a passive consumer and by-product of government,
and not as the source of all authority and legitimacy in our government.

Demanding action on this = taking possession of our Country again.



WTF?, you are now equating military intervention in a foreign countries CIVIL dispute with taking possession of YOUR OWN sovereign nation.

By what logic does that work?



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by OneManArmy

WTF?, you are now equating military intervention in a foreign countries CIVIL dispute with taking possession of YOUR OWN sovereign nation.

By what logic does that work?


We The People are the sovereign authority in this country.
The one's commanding the pulling of triggers are our employees.
I would hazard the reader to remember that.

As to action being taken by the UN,
I thought conspiracy realists were against a new world order,
why now, are so many arguing for it's legitimacy?

Abdicating one's own authority, without realizing it?


Mike
edit on 2-9-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikegrouchy

Originally posted by OneManArmy

WTF?, you are now equating military intervention in a foreign countries CIVIL dispute with taking possession of YOUR OWN sovereign nation.

By what logic does that work?


We The People are the sovereign authority in this country.
The one's commanding the pulling of triggers are our employees.
I would hazard the reader to remember that.

As to action being taken by the UN,
I thought conspiracy realists were against a new world order,
why now, are so many arguing for it's legitimacy?

Abdicating one's own authority, without realizing it?


Mike
edit on 2-9-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)


Now that I agree with 100%.



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 


You said...


If we demand it, then we were not manipulated into it.
If we force the action, then it is our decision.


Then later said...


Does no one else
get the feeling that we are being played,


Yes, yes we do get the feeling we are being played. So if we're all being played, then how can you say if we force the action, then it's our decision? It makes no sense. It's an oxymoron to be played to 'force action' if 'forcing action' is the play. Get it?

But to keep things in context...


and that some powerful interest(s) wants us
to drop the ball on this, so later we can be ignored.

This logic still makes no sense. You think the 'play' (sarin gas) is to use reverse psychology on the US to trick themselves into a corner and attack only when they have no other choice other than to 'save face'. Ridiculous. This logic you are postulating reminds me of this scene in "the Princess Bride"

The truth is, the sarin gas attack was done to 'force an attack' from the states cause everyone knows the states always gets involved. Simple. It's always been the same MO.



if we fail to _demand_ action,
as a people,
history will judge us very harshly.


Integrity, people judge integrity.



If those chemicals were a false flag,
I WANT TO KNOW FOR SURE,


The quotes I've been snipping of yours have been in chronological order so far in the thread. Clearly, your thoughts aren't. How do you go from wanting to know for sure on page 2 but your OP is attack Syria right out of the gate? Integrity. This is what I'm talking about. Shoot first ask questions later?



we should take action,
we should demand action,
we should take control,
and we should produce real evidence.


Then we should stay the hell away from it and let the UN do their job.



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by FlySolo
 


Cognitive dissonance is what I am pointing out here.

Trying to make me wear those clothes,
by posting one of my favorite movies no less
is low. Very Low.







Originally posted by FlySolo

Then we should stay the hell away from it and [color=gold] let the UN do their job.


Besides,
after eight years of reading thousands of posts arguing against the UN
and the idea of a one world government ....
.... all of a sudden they are the one everyone is fleeing to?

To make the decision for us, because maybe we are too scared to
take a stand, be all grown up, and make a goddamn decision.

Mike
edit on 2-9-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)
edit on 2-9-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by TarzanBeta
 

it works for me rather well but then again i was a RISK player too.

can't say i've ever played any champion level players but i've certainly stood my ground with several "good" ones. so much so that a few of them simply refuse to play.

patience is a virtue for a reason.

PITT was an extremely fast-paced game but hesitation was often a valuable tool that enabled a cornering of the market


the game is not always dependant on the cards you're dealt.

Martial arts is an exemplary use of 'hesitation' and evaluation before aggression. "fakes" are not equal to hesitation
and besides you claimed hesitation was EQUAL to fear.

ps ... my big, little brother is a MMA instructor.

fear and hesitation are not interchangable.

were you there ??
nope, didn't think so.
i didn't choose to hesitate, i chose to pull the trigger.
the moment of hesitation was the invitation to evaluate the options available.
it had nothing to do with fear.


Contemplating the choice at all is fear of making the wrong choice.
i thoroughly disagree.
contemplating is evidence of a thoughtful person, not an irrational one who acts first then thinks about it later.

your 'absorbtion of power' statement doesn't even make sense.

hesitation is an active exercise of patience.
and 'waiting' could be perceived multiple ways but i agree patience is one of them.


When someone says, "I am hesitant," it is because there is a fear.
again, i disagree.
if i am hesitant to evacuate, although authorities demand it, of what am i "in fear" ??
hesitant to respond to the demand does not translate to fear of anything.

when a deer is hesitant to move out of the path of an oncoming vehicle, what does it fear ?? surviving ?


I think I have thoroughly covered that for you
not really but feel free to think otherwise.

how much death ??
i guess that depends on the person, doesn't it ?
i know i've seen more than my fair share but guess what, i'm still struggling with this flesh-y existence until i'm not.

i don't want anyone to hurt either but my mere desire isn't gonna change it, is it ?

if this is true ...

But I care more about the things of the future than the things of this world.
then why encourage/endorse a military strike of any kind ??
could it be because you care less about the things of this world ?

those who allow fear to control them are foolish, imho.
however, those who harness and overcome their fear are usually successful.

i sure hope the rest of your post was directed to the board as a whole, as my days are already numbered. death will come regardless of any war.

i tend to believe that those who make war only do so because they are too primitive to overcome their own fear.

what problem ??
fear of what exactly ... dying or living ??

well, whatever group of years you choose, i'm sure someone would disagree.
what was, was, what is, is ... and what is yet to come is just that.


then you glorify far too much your ancestry and your history
ohhhh, an ad hom toward the dead ... aren't you just special ?


my friend, it is never illegal to be sovereign.
some acts taken by sovereigns can be illegal, just as any other, but existing as a sovereign is NEVER illegal, even if laws are passed that say so.

i had to read this twice and i'm still missing your point.

And in their hypocrisy, they say that young couples shouldn't get married; so now we have a bunch of baby whores having babies!
care to clarify ??

now this is a bit extreme but i do understand your point.

I should walk into my client's office and say, "Yo dude. It's not what I can clean for you; it's what you can clean for me, yo. Now gimme my check. Oh by the way, I'm giving myself a raise, because you don't do my job well enough, you jerk."

why should the world "mold to the Americas" ???
why should America be the leader of the world ??
shouldn't America just be the best she can be and let the rest do the same ??


There doesn't have to be bloodshed
show me any war that was devoid of bloodshed


ya know, i think it's time the NMH (No More Hesitation) target selection is expanded ... after the recent announcement out of Chicago, i can think of a few new designs that are necessary.

surely, you weren't talking to me ??

oh and to the other poster, Mr.93,

if so, review your own example of 'courtesy' and then get back to me about what is wrong with our society ... hint: it has less to do with war than you think.

death is a law of nature, not of man.
without the infamous 'evils' there is no balance in nature.

cont'd



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by TarzanBeta
 

cont'd from previous post


The people of the United States really need to get tough again
do you mean like they were at Waco, or Ruby Ridge or at the Hutaree camp ??

so here is my question for you ... if the majority (whomever it involves) does not believe intervention is necessary, are we the weak ones or are you ?

if you are so ready to maim and destroy others, what is your fear ?

just so we're clear, please explain why it is OK for the US government to use chemical weapons on US citizens, daily, but it is wrong for Syria ?

if the use of CW is so not tolerated, why aren't we addressing the homefront, first ??

see, here's the thing and the rub.
Mike is mostly right.
we do need to demand answers, not strikes.

i remember the mad-cow melee, do you ?
if we could trace all the way back to the single cow responsible, back then, we CAN certainly get the answers now.

do we really want the answers is an important question.
do we want to know how deeply our own POTUS is tied to the Muslim Brotherhood ?
are we ready to accept that WE might ultimately be responsible for the actual chemical used ?
do we want to know the REAL answers or just postulate possibilities ?

i defer to those who have experience and a plan of action.
however, those who choose to strike first and ask questions later aren't acting in my best interest, are they ?

while i can almost agree with Mike's stance, it doesn't seem that those with 'experience or planning suggestions' are participating.

i still don't believe a strike of any kind will solve anything.
however, we do need to demand specific action ... the question is, who will be making said demands, us or our hired henchmen ???



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 


So you are completely ignoring the fact that the drone you keep referring to does not have the capability that you claim instead you compare it to the mars rover. So essentials yo are calling for the military to develop an entirely new drone with even more advanced technology with NASA for this one instance. The question still remains do you plan on leaving that tech for the Syrians to recover or do we send in people to get it putting our forces in harms way still?

Seems like you haven't thought this through very far. BTW I am just wondering how much money do you think we should spend on developing this brand new one of a kind rover for Syria?



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikegrouchy

Does this mean your are in the discussion merely for the fashion statement,
that no solutions will be offered, no contribution to finding the right path.


Mike


No fashion statement.


I honnestly dont think there is a solution.

Its too messy and complicated!

Fireing off missles wont work, a full scale invation wont work.

So best bet is to keep well clear. What the point of acting for the sake of acting when its likley not only to do no good but instead cause BIGGER problems.

Best thing to do is just concentrate on not letting the war spread to the countrys next door.



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by DrHammondStoat
 


It is ridiculous. It's sad. History as a sign: we allow disease instead of defending prevention.

I have to imagine a few things, as, as you say, it is hard to _know_

War is money and America needs a lot of it.

If USA goes to war, granted the world is 'ok' with it (which we aren't), then the war machine makes money and America is happy.

If the people are united against this, as much as they seem to be, and it causes some outrage on American soil (maybe even something planned) it could trigger marshal-law or something like that.

I'm spilling gravy out my pie-hole. But at this point it's all up in the air, isn't it... help me catch it??



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 02:58 PM
link   
This Country,

The United States of America

Is our house.


Central and South America are

our front Yard, Canada the attic.


The rest of the world is our Back Yard.





If the reader cannot see it that way,
they maybe this isn't their house,
maybe they are just a hireling,
visitor, or servant.

Only the reader can know for sure.


Mike
edit on 2-9-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikegrouchy



Central and South America are

our front Yard, Canada the attic.


The rest of the world is our Back Yard.





If the reader cannot see it that way,
they maybe this isn't their house,
maybe they are just a hireling,
visitor, or servant.

Only the reader can know for sure.


Mike
edit on 2-9-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)


Im in the UK, this is my house not your backyard. You are not speaking for me.
Im a free citizen(to a relative extent). I know this for sure.
I also know that the rest of the world that you call your "backyard" wont appreciate you deciding for them what they think.
edit on 2-9-2013 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 






I think that kind of says most of it.



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 





Cognitive dissonance is what I am pointing out here.


For whom? Me or you? I feel no dichotomy towards staying the hell out of Syria.




Trying to make me wear those clothes,


Just pointing out the obvious truth and placing things in perspective here. If the shoe fits...




Besides,
after eight years of reading thousands of posts arguing against the UN
and the idea of a one world government ....
.... all of a sudden they are the one everyone is fleeing to?

To make the decision for us, because maybe we are too scared to
take a stand, be all grown up, and make a goddamn decision.



The decision to be made is to stand down and have a proper investigation. Period. You said it yourself, we need to know what happened. Being 'grown up' means to use due diligence. Being 'grown up' means not to fly off the handle. Being 'grown up' means to make decisions which are sound and not influenced by emotions.

I get the feeling you haven't even looked at this crisis for the geopolitical strategies involved either. The players, the contracts, the $10 billion dollar gas pipelines, the bribes, the European gas, the secular wars, Putin and on and on and on...



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 

hmmmm, i wonder if Asia has a similar viewpoint ?
or maybe China or Russia ... after all, didn't Palin mention being able to see Russia from her 'backyard' ??

what's with the 'ownership of the world' reference but the attack of Fuku is just 'noise' ??

either we own it or we don't, so which is it ??



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by OneManArmy

Im [color=gold] in the UK, this is my house not your backyard. You are not speaking for me.
Im a free citizen(to a relative extent). I know this for sure.
I also know that the rest of the world that you call your "backyard" wont appreciate you deciding for them what they think.





/sarcasm

Yeah, because the British have
Nothing
to do with Syria.

They were not key in the formation of modern Syria
at the end of world war 2.

/end sarcasm


Syria is their child,
and just like the Royals of old
they have disowned the bastard
because it is inconvenient to be responsible.

As much as the British public
claims they dislike the Royals
and their behavior, they sure
are acting like them.



Apparently the only person
left in the British Common Wealth
that isn't acting like a Royal,
is PM Cameron.


Mike



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darkblade71
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 






I think that kind of says most of it.





A one world government might not be such a bad idea,
if we knew who was behind it all.

But go ahead and listen
to the raptor if that's
what you want.


Mike
edit on 2-9-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 





new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join