Thanks U.K. For (temporarily) Averting WW3

page: 1
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 04:21 AM
link   
While the media busily spins Obama's latest abject failure in Syria into victory, those of us with attention spans longer than the average house fly will remember that we would have not reached this point had it not been for our brothers across the pond.

The unraveling of Obama's war began when British Parliament voted down a resolution to strike Syria. Had it not been for this vote, which American media spun as an absolute disaster, a vote in Congress would have never been requested. Keep in mind Libya was never voted upon, and in fact when law required that military action be authorized by Congress based upon the limitations of the War Powers Act, Obama changed the definition of war, calling it a "kinetic military action", and thus not open to debate.

This time around, thanks to British Parliament's resounding 'No' on military action in Syria, Obama was forced to face his own constituency, for how could one beacon of democracy allow it's citizens' voices to be heard while the greatest champion of freedom ignored their own. Had Obama struck without the consent of Britain, and the American public, his legacy would have been tarnished beyond repair, a charge the Narcissist in Chief could never stomach, to be reduced to the level of George Bush, the worst president up until this one.

Had the U.K. rubber stamped military action in Syria, John Kerry would have never had a chance to make a fool of his Herman Munster head in front of Congress, the Tom Cruise missiles would already be sailing through Damascus doorways, laying waste to one of the oldest cities on the planet and paving the way to WW3. But what happened? The Brits, you lovely bastards, said no, and I sincerely thank you from half a dozen time zones away.

Since your no vote, the American public has grown a pair and shared your sentiment with their representatives, who have since stopped dancing to O'bomb'em's war drums. The tide has turned, and now the warhawks have been forced to the negotiating table by no action of their own. Diplomacy happened by accident, the war is on hold for the time being, but anyone who watches the news with one eye open can see the new spin - the vote is called off for now, though the Russian proposal will never work, and if another chemical attack occurs there will be no vote, only action.

Know that the next time an atrocity happens it will be blamed upon those of us who rallied against war, our "inaction" will be blamed for the death of innocents, and used to guilt the rest of the population into war.

For now we are winning, thanks in large part to our brethren in Great Britain who stood up to David Cameron, may we all remain steadfast here in America against Obama, and not let whatever comes next deter us from this fight for peace and freedom.

Thanks U.K.! We way disagree on a host of issues here on ATS, but on Syria we stand united. Keep up the fight, and know that your insolence makes you a target. Remain strong, we'll do the same, and again, a sincere thanks.



edit on 12-9-2013 by DirtyD because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-9-2013 by DirtyD because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-9-2013 by DirtyD because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 04:25 AM
link   
I don't speak for the whole of the UK, clearly, but you're very welcome.



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 04:48 AM
link   
reply to post by khimbar
 


I'm not sure how many of us here is in the U.S. of A. recognize the significance of that vote, but I for one do, and am greatly appreciative. I spent all day afterward screaming at my television, "Where's my vote!", as the media chastised Britain while furthering the push for war.



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 05:10 AM
link   
reply to post by DirtyD
 


As a Brit you're welcome.

We do need to intervene with Syria. We need to save all the poor innocent souls that are dying in their senseless civil war. However, hurriedly flinging a few missiles in their direction was never the answer, forcing the powers that be to have to talk about things first may result in a much better solution.

For once, democracy seems to be working.



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 05:29 AM
link   

barwars47
reply to post by DirtyD
 


As a Brit you're welcome.

We do need to intervene with Syria. We need to save all the poor innocent souls that are dying in their senseless civil war. However, hurriedly flinging a few missiles in their direction was never the answer, forcing the powers that be to have to talk about things first may result in a much better solution.

For once, democracy seems to be working.


I think we've already done enough intervening in Syria, and that goes for both our countries arming the so-called opposition. Democracy may be working for the time being, but the powers that be are actively searching for a way to circumvent us troublesome peaceniks. They want their war, Russia's proposal to confiscate chemical weapons is seen as a setback.
edit on 12-9-2013 by DirtyD because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 05:37 AM
link   
I'm British myself.. unfortunately..!


To be honest I'm proud of our nation too, the way the people all stood in the wake of the crap were facing with politics and government idiocracy..
And rightly so the US voted in a very similar fashion..


The powers that be now have to face the people speaking..and not just in 'the individual..'

I'm not damning the government or whoever- by any means- they do a great job in many respects, and it cannot be the easiest of tasks- I would imagine..
But, soldiers are there to correct the problems the diplomats and politicians cause..
More war to stop war is pretty idiotic IMO.. (In 'masses' opinion)

But, fact is that it is a war that does not involve us- and if it does involve us then there are other reasons for why we are there..(ie -oil etc..)

Can it be..? The people are free..!?



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 05:52 AM
link   

GuardianX
I'm British myself.. unfortunately..!


To be honest I'm proud of our nation too, the way the people all stood in the wake of the crap were facing with politics and government idiocracy..
And rightly so the US voted in a very similar fashion..


The powers that be now have to face the people speaking..and not just in 'the individual..'

I'm not damning the government or whoever- by any means- they do a great job in many respects, and it cannot be the easiest of tasks- I would imagine..
But, soldiers are there to correct the problems the diplomats and politicians cause..
More war to stop war is pretty idiotic IMO.. (In 'masses' opinion)

But, fact is that it is a war that does not involve us- and if it does involve us then there are other reasons for why we are there..(ie -oil etc..)

Can it be..? The people are free..!?





You should be proud, even though you're British...

It was a historic vote to be sure, proving to the people that we are free, but only so long as we stay vigilant! The other shoe is sure to drop soon, and I predict it falling upon your country as punishment.

edit on 12-9-2013 by DirtyD because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-9-2013 by DirtyD because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 06:10 AM
link   
Lol punish Britain..?

Fear not, God will save our queen..!
But, in the off chance he doesn't..
We will..!


Remember:
'Victory Rewards Preparation..'

For freedom, we stand..!



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 06:15 AM
link   
reply to post by DirtyD
 


It is very kind of you to thank the UK. The vote was taken and for once the voice of the people ruled. This happened because of a concerted effort of people ringing or speaking to their MPs to say NO, you don't leap off to any more wars.

Cameron had desperately wanted to get into Syria but not the people. These wars seem to be about a group wanting to consolidate their hold on the ME and to keep all economies linked to oil, nothing more.



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Shiloh7
reply to post by DirtyD
 


It is very kind of you to thank the UK. The vote was taken and for once the voice of the people ruled. This happened because of a concerted effort of people ringing or speaking to their MPs to say NO, you don't leap off to any more wars.

Cameron had desperately wanted to get into Syria but not the people. These wars seem to be about a group wanting to consolidate their hold on the ME and to keep all economies linked to oil, nothing more.


We still haven't gotten our vote yet, it's been put on hold while Obama figures a way around it. He, like Cameron, desperately wants this war. The only hope of averting it is to recognize the goal, and rail against it.



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 06:45 AM
link   
Let's not get carried away here. The motion was defeated by 285 - 272 which indicates that there are still major problems and that a huge number of MP's are not listening to what the people want. I haven't met anyone who is actually in favour of involvement in the conflict, so to have that many MP's voting for some form of military intervention is extremely worrying. There is something very wrong about this country and one parliamentary vote doesn't change that.



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 06:54 AM
link   
reply to post by DirtyD
 


I was surprised at the outcome of the vote. I'd expected the big warmongering corporations who profit from these wars to have bribed enough politicians to vote for it. Thankfully that didn't happen (or work). I'm still extremely skeptical about the entire situation, and fully expect Cameron to turn his back on the people once again in the interests of profit. He's just waiting for the right moment.



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 07:19 AM
link   
reply to post by DirtyD
 





Had the U.K. rubber stamped military action in Syria, John Kerry would have never had a chance to make a fool of his Herman Munster head in front of Congress, the Tom Cruise missiles would already be sailing through Damascus doorways, laying waste to one of the oldest cities on the planet and paving the way to WW3


That is a massive assumption with nothing at all to back it up. First of all, the US has never had a problem bombing/attacking anyone AND going it alone. Secondly, i don't buy Obama was ever going to attack. I think there was too much aggressive rhetoric and grandstanding. There seemed to be a whole lot of pumped up chest and yelling " I'm gonna kick yo ass!" but a decided lack of the ass kicking proper, if you will.

If he did attack, i think Obama would have done the bare minimum Clinton style attack - i.e. empty buildings, that sort of thing.

I seriously don't think America's leadership gives a rats ass what anyone else thinks, IF it thinks, it is Right and Just in the actions it is contemplating. Our President has a lot of flexibility when it comes to military action. He can swing his Presidential "unit of power" around all he wants for a few months. Now, would it have been better to have the Brits with us, of course. Hell Obama would love to have as many people on the band- wagon as he could, so as to provide some sort of legitimacy to his left wing Obamanites.

However, make no mistake, if push came to shove the US would certainly go it alone. Believe dat!



V
edit on 9/12/2013 by Variable because: commas



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 07:19 AM
link   
You can thank people power and the internet. if it wasn't for the overwhelming phone calls and letters sent to our elected representatives those in power would have voted to strike, i have no doubt about that.

Americas peoples also dont have the stomach for another pointless bombing campaign and that message is getting through your own elected representatives thick skulls...

keep the thumb screws on them USA, the world is watching..



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 07:29 AM
link   
israel has been quiet of late and has attacked syria 6 times lately but does not get a lot of press over it if any they are the ones to watch in the future obama gave them a green light in his speech .

yesterday 100.000s of thousands of bikers drove on washinton dc yet not one bit of press in the u.k only r.t showed any air time on it .

give them time to lick their wounds till the next episode of who can we kill now for profit is aired



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Scorchio
 


It was a free vote too! No Whips involved in assisting those MP's that voted Aye to ignore the consensus amongst the general population!

Parliament will go to the vote on Syria again and the Whips will be out in force, making sure rogue, ie non war mongering MP's remember the deselection processes!



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 08:46 AM
link   
I just had to say that is one of the most well written expressions of gratitude coupled with the bigger picture I have read. You showed how they are the reason this has taken a diplomatic path while also spelling out how broken our own nation is. I especially liked the part of UK representatives listening to their people while ours do not. I think your expression of this is fit for more wide spread publicarion. Hope many read it and take it all in.



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Dianec
 


Thanks, it came from the heart, and I've been wishing to express my gratitude to the Brits for some time over that vote. They threw a huge monkey wrench in the war machine that I don't think anyone expected.

I hope everyone in the UK reads it and knows some of us Yanks truly appreciate what their lawmakers have done.



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Variable
reply to post by DirtyD
 





Had the U.K. rubber stamped military action in Syria, John Kerry would have never had a chance to make a fool of his Herman Munster head in front of Congress, the Tom Cruise missiles would already be sailing through Damascus doorways, laying waste to one of the oldest cities on the planet and paving the way to WW3


That is a massive assumption with nothing at all to back it up. First of all, the US has never had a problem bombing/attacking anyone AND going it alone. Secondly, i don't buy Obama was ever going to attack. I think there was too much aggressive rhetoric and grandstanding. There seemed to be a whole lot of pumped up chest and yelling " I'm gonna kick yo ass!" but a decided lack of the ass kicking proper, if you will.

If he did attack, i think Obama would have done the bare minimum Clinton style attack - i.e. empty buildings, that sort of thing.

I seriously don't think America's leadership gives a rats ass what anyone else thinks, IF it thinks, it is Right and Just in the actions it is contemplating. Our President has a lot of flexibility when it comes to military action. He can swing his Presidential "unit of power" around all he wants for a few months. Now, would it have been better to have the Brits with us, of course. Hell Obama would love to have as many people on the band- wagon as he could, so as to provide some sort of legitimacy to his left wing Obamanites.

However, make no mistake, if push came to shove the US would certainly go it alone. Believe dat!



V
edit on 9/12/2013 by Variable because: commas


I don't think I'm making any assumptions here. Had the Brits voted yeah, do you think Obama would have ever consulted congress? He certainly didn't seek American approval to bomb Libya. The Brits reminded us that supposed free nations still do vote on military action, something Obama certainly wanted to avoid, knowing the outcome would not go in his favor. The world has not been fooled this time, and I certainly don't buy this false narrative that's being spun in the media that Obama doesn't want to go to war so is looking for a way out. The minute bombs stopped dropping on Tripoli, Obama and company put the crosshairs on Damascus. They thought with this last round of chemical attacks that the world would give them the green light to strike, but alas the British Parliament put up the stop sign. Huge. I firmly believe had that vote gone the other way, war would already be upon us, and neither Congress nor the American people would have ever had a say in it.



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 01:18 PM
link   
Thanks for thanking my nation, but in all fairness, our hands are just as tied as yours.

We were lucky.

When news broke, and sock puppet William Hague bounced onto the worlds TV screens holding Assad accountable, I honestly thought it was a done deal.

I was overjoyed, and a little bewildered to hear the outcome of the vote, but a great result that was.

Did anyone else notice the Cameron appeared relieved to announce to no vote, like he had just been let off the hook by a gang of murderous bullies, I suppose he was.



Lastly, we also owe a great deal of thanks to Putin, who proved to be a master tactician when dealing with the military threat.

If you saw the article and video on RT exposing 9/11, then you are probably right in thinking that this was a warning shot to the US administration, kind of blackmailing the blackmailers.

Back down Obama, or I'll tell the world what really happened, and you will never recover from it.

Don't think that Russia couldn't bury him if they wanted to, with or without Ed Snowden.



top topics
 
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join