Modded Mustang Forums banner

1 - 20 of 279 Posts

·
dirt/street Motorsports
Joined
·
683 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Does Obama know what he is doing? Is this a good ideal? And were the hell is the anti war folks? .......... just looking for some opinions on this .if their is no threat to the U.S why cant we just leave it alone. have we learned nothing yet after 12 years of war.:screwy:
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
33,198 Posts
are we bombing them? last i heard, britain moved ships over and threatened to attack, obama hadn't made a decision yet, then russia moved ships over there and said there would be consequences if we attacked, and we haven't made much talk since then. ****'s hard to keep up with
 

·
That Regular Guy
Joined
·
10,393 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
33,198 Posts
yeah, AP is still saying we still haven't done anything. we don't even know which side used the chemical weapons, our government just wants to believe it's bashar al assad so they can have an excuse to go to war

and the UK voted against getting involved
 

·
dirt/street Motorsports
Joined
·
683 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
well i really hope we dont do this. but the war buzz usually means were going to
 

·
I love to skydive
Joined
·
17,286 Posts
England has concluded that they will not join the us if we decide to pursue.

Here we go again, being nosy as ****

---------- Post added at 07:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:23 PM ----------

And john, congress votes to go to war. Not the president.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,489 Posts
Interesting.
I was on I-75 which sits on the east side over the bay from McDill AFB. As I was driving home this morning, I seen a pair of refueling tankers heading East. Hmmmm...hardly ever see 2 together like that. They dont fly those around for nothing.

We cannot allow any country to break rules when it comes to wmd and chemical weapons. That does not mean I think we should go to war. however, we have to do something. too many rouge crazy nations and what message does this send when we back down like bitches? We have to do something even if its cutting off their cable TV for a week taking their cell phone away. There has to be a consequence or we will pay later with a REAL threat from a REAL country.

---------- Post added at 08:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:32 PM ----------

Geeeezus. Thread title made my heart jump. Back to football!

mine too...I though oh ****
 

·
I love to skydive
Joined
·
17,286 Posts
That's the UN that needs to intervene. Not solely the us. I don't know the image we'll produce if we backed down, but I know what image we produce if we go barging in.
 

·
That Regular Guy
Joined
·
10,393 Posts
That's the UN that needs to intervene. Not solely the us. I don't know the image we'll produce if we backed down, but I know what image we produce if we go barging in.
They have been doing a good job so far in Syria with all this. If I remember correctly, the president of Syria let them run tests and what not on those effected by the chemical weapons.


Sent from AutoGuide.com App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,093 Posts
So would the conservative consensus be that BHO should not attack?

John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
891 Posts
We need to stay the hell out of it. Yes the Syrian gov't needs to go, but the rebels are now mostly al qaeda fighters now. So if we do bomb the gov't then we help the terrorists. obama wants to do something, because he thinks it will make him looks strong and hopefully get some respect around the world. The problem is he has lost all respect and is now acting like a spoiled kid. Yes he made the threat, that if chemical weapons were used, we would intervene. He was figuring, they wouldn't be used and we still aren't sure they were. Well we are as sure as we were of WMDs in Iraq. Funny how now he believes the intel is better. As for as I am concerned, if muslim extremists are killing muslim extremists, then we get some popcorn, sit back and watch the show. If we stick our nose in, then we will end up with a proxy war, with Iran and Russia.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,147 Posts
I think we need to stop butting our noses in other peoples problems. We cant, nor should we try to, be the world police. Its simply not our problem, yes chemical warfare is bad but we have our own issues to contend with currently, we need to take a step back and let someone else handle it while we take a break from war and let the military, economy, population, etc recoup and take a rest from war.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,093 Posts
I think we need to stop butting our noses in other peoples problems. We cant, nor should we try to, be the world police. Its simply not our problem, yes chemical warfare is bad but we have our own issues to contend with currently, we need to take a step back and let someone else handle it while we take a break from war and let the military, economy, population, etc recoup and take a rest from war.
So if all the nations took this approach nothing would happen and tyrannical regimes would be, in essence, getting the green light to execute whatever atrocities they decided to employ to keep themselves in power.

Once it becomes the "new normal" attacks on the US would follow......

I'm not condoning nor rejecting a strike on Syria. I'm simply laying out a very probable scenario.

John
 

·
Skirt Chasing Philanderer
Joined
·
14,391 Posts
I relatively agree with you Nova but we aren't really a super power anymore. Policing the world is not our responsibility. Why are we responsible for fixing this? Why are we even in a position where our country is defined and opinions are formed of us from this?

I don't think it shows weakness, I think it shows its not our fight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,093 Posts
I relatively agree with you Nova but we aren't really a super power anymore. Policing the world is not our responsibility. Why are we responsible for fixing this? Why are we even in a position where our country is defined and opinions are formed of us from this?

I don't think it shows weakness, I think it shows its not our fight.
I have to disagree with you. I think it has EVERYTHING to do with showing our weakness but beyond that it will also show that our character as Americans is based solely on MONEY!

I think we can all agree that the use of chemical weapons is a red line in ANY conflict. We are the one nation that has always been the guiding light in regards to human rights and morality in general. If we don't respond we are telling the world that as long as our economy is bad our morals are compromisable. THAT to me is what has been the biggest detriment to our position in the world. We use to be unshakeable in our moral beliefs but nowadays we won't respond to atrocities because we can't afford it? So what is it? Are we a moral nation or are we only concerned with how comfortable we are?

IMO this has been the biggest factor in our negative middle east reputation. We go into a country claiming that we are there to help their people yet the moment our own interests are met we bail on them and leave them hanging......Not only are we seen as untrustworthy but we become outright liars. Not a good if we are trying to garner these nations respect.

Again, I'm neither condoning nor rejecting an attack on Syria. I'm not really sure what we should do.

Getting involved wouldn't be a good idea AT ALL. I agree with Durr, the UN needs to intervene as a whole, not just the US.
Good luck getting any sort of consensus from the UN. China and Russia will never agree to a unilateral attack on Syria. They're making too much money from this whole scenario.

John
 
1 - 20 of 279 Posts
Top