DescentBB

spelled out on Leno last night:

"“I’d crater the runways, the six air fields that Bashar Assad uses. I’d prevent him from using his air power. I would get the weapons to the people who are fighting and dying as we speak, and I would probably get a safe zone… you could do that in one day and you would not put a single American in any danger because you could do it with standoff weapons.”


nahhh, there's no way any American would be put into danger by this plan, huh? Darned shame McCain cannot be bothered to project past day two of his plan, as this strategy could put a lot of Americans in a lot of danger for a couple of decades, especially the part about getting weapons to the opposition.

callmeslick wrote:s...
nahhh, there's no way any American would be put into danger by this plan, huh? Darned shame McCain cannot be bothered to project past day two of his plan, as this strategy could put a lot of Americans in a lot of danger for a couple of decades, especially the part about getting weapons to the opposition.

Weapons to the opposition?
Like when Hillary/Obama sent surface to air missiles to those very same people in Syria by way of the operation they were running out of Benghazi before it blew up in their face...well, in the face of our ambassador and a some of our brave operatives....Hillary and Obama didn't even let the resulting inquiry touch them.

Yea, it is a bad idea now just like it was then....

If you ask me, those remarks from the secretary of state encourages this kinds of thing.

Not that John needs any encouragement in such matters, but I also see this as an attempt to shift blame if something the president does goes wrong.

The president is under no obligation to listen to McCain.

As I have said before.

Spidey wrote:The president is under no obligation to listen to McCain.

I should hope the hell that's the case!

Maybe this explains Sigma's rhetoric:

[youtube]D6h9tTz5VYE[/youtube]

Well duh, of course it would be an act of aggression. Our idiot administration are the only people in the world who would rationalize it otherwise. I would love for Russia to sink all our ships in the Mediterranean "preemptively" and see how the US likes it and how their hands would be completely tied to do nothing. Tired of this crap. We have no business there without the UN.

Well, aside from the sinking ships, agreed. That was the whole reason the UN was conceived, it will be very interesting to see their response. I hope that's Obama's intentions. To get consensus here, then bring it before the UN. If the whole international community sees fit to allow what is happening in Syria, it would be a great move diplomatically for the US. We could lay the whole blame and responsibility at the UN's feet and start to repair our image as the 'imperialist Americans.' I honestly think we will strike Syria and then the whole thing will escalate with us eventually with boots on the ground there. Hope I'm wrong.

vision wrote:I would love for Russia to sink all our ships in the Mediterranean "preemptively" and see how the US likes it and how their hands would be completely tied to do nothing.

Says the man who doesn't believe in violence under any conditions...

vision wrote:Well duh, of course it would be an act of aggression. Our idiot administration are the only people in the world who would rationalize it otherwise. I would love for Russia to sink all our ships in the Mediterranean "preemptively" and see how the US likes it and how their hands would be completely tied to do nothing. Tired of this crap. We have no business there without the UN.

Ooooh, that might just happen. Our arrogant military and our continuing succession of warmongering leaders could use a little Russian head knocking.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/ ... AK20130829

vision wrote:Well duh, of course it would be an act of aggression. Our idiot administration are the only people in the world who would rationalize it otherwise. I would love for Russia to sink all our ships in the Mediterranean "preemptively" and see how the US likes it and how their hands would be completely tied to do nothing. Tired of this crap. We have no business there without the UN.

Considering how useless the UN has become (in large part because of Russian obstructionism), I'm perfectly happy with blissfully ignoring them.

My only reservation is the uncanny ability Golitsyn had to predict the future. Considering every single thing he predicted in 1984 is now a reality, the only things not accomplished yet is to diplomatically isolate us and financially cripple us. Russia could very well being using Assad to accomplish just that. I don't hear anybody on this board or in real life talking about Russia, their democratized, but to listen to Sigma saying the same things that I hear Putin saying in national broadcasts, well it doesn't take a genius to know that were being slurred over there. Putin is real good about how he does it, but I see right through him. He knows exactly how to leave a bad impression, without coming right out and saying it. Kinda like throwing rocks and then hiding your hand. If our administration has any sense at all, they will pull off Syria. Otherwise, I believe they are playing right into the plan. Once we are completely diplomatically isolated, be sure to watch for the next attack to be against the dollar as the world reserve currency.

Spidey wrote:Says the man who doesn't believe in violence under any conditions...

Thanks for pointing that out Spidey. I apologize. That was a terrible thing for me to say. It was said out of frustration and helplessness as the leaders of the United States follow a truly insane plan to start a world war against the wishes of, well, EVERYONE. The main point of my comment was to have the United States put in a position where it has to sit on it's hands indefinitely. I really think it's time for the other nations in the world to stand up the the US and say "it is time for you to stop your shenanigans." As horrible as it would be, Russia sinking a few ships would send a clear message that we are waaaaay overstepping our bounds here. (In my mind I'm going to have a deluded fantasy that Russia can sink our ships without any loss of life or trauma.)

Most Senators undecided on Syria attack vote. One-fourth approve. Call Congress (202) 224-3121

It's easy enough. Call the number above a real person will field your call to whichever member of Congress you choose.
I simply said for Congress to vote no and to encourage Obama to push for UN involvement.

I've called Isakson so far, but I intend to call many more.

vision wrote:

Spidey wrote:Says the man who doesn't believe in violence under any conditions...

Thanks for pointing that out Spidey. I apologize. That was a terrible thing for me to say. It was said out of frustration and helplessness as the leaders of the United States follow a truly insane plan to start a world war against the wishes of, well, EVERYONE. The main point of my comment was to have the United States put in a position where it has to sit on it's hands indefinitely. I really think it's time for the other nations in the world to stand up the the US and say "it is time for you to stop your shenanigans." As horrible as it would be, Russia sinking a few ships would send a clear message that we are waaaaay overstepping our bounds here. (In my mind I'm going to have a deluded fantasy that Russia can sink our ships without any loss of life or trauma.)

Or, starting world war three.

Hey…I understand exactly how you feel, I am against any attack on Syria. What I don’t understand is the White House’s determination.

The UN was/is a nice sentiment but without a strong common goal and same-ethics no group of nations will conduct a 'United Nations' organization in a proper way as judged by any one or two members standards.

The US has the Constitution and Bill of Rights etc. that expresses our common goal and binds us voluntarily to it. Thus we can see the 'law' is enforceable and it serves the whole citizenry.

I'm sure the UN has some kind of document, charter, etc....and I'm pretty sure it is full of holes so it isn't even worth it's weight in toilet paper.

One planet, one people? Sounds great!
Not happening until there is one common goal to bind us.

A lot of smart people, who study people, say it will be by strength that we eventually reach a place where a common goal is recognized if it ever comes. Strength, not always executed through simple violence but certainly only through strength.

Obama is flexing a muscle he doesn't fully understand.

I agree with you on that aspect of the UN. It's not what it is said to be, but what it is does have is immense political power to sway world opinion.

Spidey wrote:Or, starting world war three.

Yeah maybe. I think if people actually fought back against the playground bully (US) maybe there would be a similar outcome? A little bit of peace? Really, even with the size of our military the United States would be in shambles if we decided to engage someone the size of Russia or China -- without the use of nukes, just economically speaking. Right?

Will Robinson wrote:Not happening until there is one common goal to bind us.

Shouldn't the one common goal too bind us be "to work out our problems in a forum like the UN?" I guess that is not enough? The UN has definitely done some great things and will do good in the future too. It just needs work, like any governing body. I have some faith in it, plus it's the only thing we have.

Spidey wrote:Hey…I understand exactly how you feel, I am against any attack on Syria. What I don’t understand is the White House’s determination.

Easy: Obama believes that the use of a weapon of mass destruction against civilian populations is completely unacceptable, and wishes to strongly discourage any that would use them again. I for one agree with him. There's no good outcome from this no matter what we do, so why not at least send the message, "★■◆● you, don't do this ★■◆●"?

Yea…what happened to “Isn’t it time we stopped being the world’s police”.

vision wrote:...

Will Robinson wrote:Not happening until there is one common goal to bind us.

Shouldn't the one common goal too bind us be "to work out our problems in a forum like the UN?" I guess that is not enough?

One mans problem is another mans solution. Woman is raped? Stone her for causing the man to lose control of his desires.
Without the common goals same-ethic, same-morality there is no chance for common laws to hold the different cultures in line.

The U.S., as an example, isn't 'working' because some guys in powdered wigs made up a bunch of rules and that forced us to adopt their vision of a democracy. It works because we volunteered to adopt them...they were what we wanted....what each generation has been taught to want and respect since then. That is the only way they work. Start to teach alternative view points and it crumbles...(that is beginning to happen but that's a topic for another discussion)

So, on an international scale, U.N style, try to govern vastly alternative values and you get regular instances of non compliance and violent rebellion.

vision wrote:...The UN has definitely done some great things and will do good in the future too. It just needs work, like any governing body. I have some faith in it, plus it's the only thing we have.

I agree, it is a good start but in today's world it is like a caveman looking up at the moon thinking he wants to go there. He needs all the other cavemen to want that goal or he will never build a rocketship.

Spidey wrote:Yea…what happened to “Isn’t it time we stopped being the world’s police”.

Trust me, I'd love to, but since the rest of the world seems to want to sit around with their thumbs up their asses and not do anything at all when weapons of mass destruction are deployed against civilians, it unfortunately seems like things are left up to us yet again.

Top Gun wrote:

Spidey wrote:Yea…what happened to “Isn’t it time we stopped being the world’s police”.

Trust me, I'd love to, but since the rest of the world seems to want to sit around with their thumbs up their asses and not do anything at all when weapons of mass destruction are deployed against civilians, it unfortunately seems like things are left up to us yet again.

That's exactly the thinking that got us to the current role in the first place. If the rest of the world wishes to do nothing, we should join them. It isn't like we don't have boatloads of other issues that could use the money, the energy and the political willpower to address.