So me thinks we be headed to action in Syria soon

Besides, you have nothing to stand on to declare Obama incompetent as the CinC. He did something that the Chimp failed (or decided not) to do and that was kill Bin Laden

Come on man, that is pretty lame, and has nothing to do with his financial and economic policy.

hideous PERMANENT DEBT

Negative on that one.

All I’m seeing is finger pointing, with nothing to uphold Obama’s current situation. There is no ground to stand on. As bad as you can make out his predecessors to be, it just makes him look worse. If we want to look at past presidents, I’m going back to John Adams!

Our CnC has got us on a plane nose diving for Detroit Central, with some chanting O-ba-ma all the way down.

FORE!! Watch out now!

Now you are derailing the train…we’re talking SPENDING FOR WAR here! This thread has to do with the merits of use of US force in the Syrian Civil War. I will not let it become a blanket indictment of current spending and as I said before:

Congress passes the Federal budget…they alone hold the power to tax and spend not the Administration

The last time I checked the US House of Representatives was controlled by Republicans.

Now, if you will remain on message then good, but I have no intention to follow you if you intend to spin this from Damascus to Detroit.

We are at war with Syria, we always have been at war with Syria, we always will be at war with Syria. War with Syria is double plus good, chocolate rations have seen a 14% increase in the last month.

[QUOTE=Fraqrat;118759]We are at war with Syria, we always have been at war with Syria, we always will be at war with Syria. War with Syria is double plus good, chocolate rations have seen a 14% increase in the last month.[/QUOTE]

I didn’t know they had pork in Syria? I thought the Nation of Cereal had all the strategic bacon reserves in the world?

I also want to know where you get that good American chocolate? You can buy girls by the truckload with American chocolate and nylons!

Congress passes the Federal budget…they alone hold the power to tax and spend not the Administration

True, so you can thank the 104, 105, and 106th United States Congress conservative majority during the Clinton years. That being said, the President does sign the spending bill and pushes stuff through congress. I can think of several ridiculous appropriations that have been pushed for and signed by Obama. O, and what party keeps putting (hiding) those crazy earmarks into bills?

As one once said

Like I said before, this thread is about Syria and the merits of US involvement. Stick to the topic please!

Ok lets get back on track. In my defense however, look at post 31, you started talking finances, past presidents, policies, etc in defense of someone bashing our current CnC and carried it on.

So getting back on track, bombing Syria is a TERRIBLE idea, and as everyone has stated, will be nothing more then a political move by dear leader to show we did something and will accomplish NOTHING. The Syrians will work it out unless the Arab league steps in sooner. Supporting either side is pointless, as not one is better than the other and they are BOTH committing unspeakable atrocities!

[QUOTE=c.captain;118756]That is such an intelligent statement! Do you have a master’s degree in being smart?

Btw, being such a genius you must also have great debating skills and grasp of discourse…I guess you are too shy and retiring to actually use your tremendous innate abilities.

anyway, I am not going to descend to this…I will argue and debate but I don’t crawl into a gutter to throw shit calling each other “poopyhead” names. If you’ve shot your wad here then I for one am very happy with the outcome. Thanks for an easy victory.[/QUOTE]

I didnt name any names but if the shoe fits…

No im not a great typist or a great debater, but im not a blowhard who thinks he is superior to everyone else either.

You were talking about Bush reading a kids book to a kindergarten class on Sept 11, thats what he was scheduled to that day. Do you expect the leader of the free world to stop everything everytime he reads a report about a possible terrorist incident? No because he would never be able to leave the Oval Office. But since you bring 9/11 up where was obama on 9/11/12 when Ambassador Stevens’ body was being drug up and down the streets as a trophy. Where was he when the US Embassy in Egypt was being stormed and the black flag of Al-Quida run up its flagpole? It sounds like obama had intelligence that those events were going to happen as well, so why didnt he release the USMC fast action group that was stationed in Italy to back up the contractors who were already on the ground?

I was no fan of the wars in Iraq and Afghan, even then I felt like it was a waste of troops lives and taxpayers money. I feel the same about Syria.

still a very small statement to make

No im not a great typist or a great debater, but im not a blowhard who thinks he is superior to everyone else either.

your opinion which you are entitled to but pardon me all to hell for being a man who likes a good debate and is not afraid to have the courage of my convictions…in some places that is known as integrity

You were talking about Bush reading a kids book to a kindergarten class on Sept 11, thats what he was scheduled to that day. Do you expect the leader of the free world to stop everything everytime he reads a report about a possible terrorist incident? No because he would never be able to leave the Oval Office. But since you bring 9/11 up where was obama on 9/11/12 when Ambassador Stevens’ body was being drug up and down the streets as a trophy. Where was he when the US Embassy in Egypt was being stormed and the black flag of Al-Quida run up its flagpole? It sounds like obama had intelligence that those events were going to happen as well, so why didnt he release the USMC fast action group that was stationed in Italy to back up the contractors who were already on the ground?

do not for one moment attempt to equate the loss of 4 Americans in Libya to the loss of over 3000 on 9/11/01 when there were warnings from the National Security Council that a terror attach was imminent and would likely involve the use of airliners. Cheney let it happen because he knew it would open the door for all his dreams to come true…Bush was and still is just a stoopid puppet…he was probably struggling to read that book that September morning!

I was no fan of the wars in Iraq and Afghan, even then I felt like it was a waste of troops lives and taxpayers money. I feel the same about Syria.

That is all completely fair! I for one believe that Syria is a case which is testing what constitutes a valid military response to a situation that is not a direct threat to the US but is quite possibly an indirect threat since stability in the region is in the US’s and world’s interest. I believe we need Assad out of there but neither should be allow new leaders in Syria which are closely allied to Iran. Remember that Israel is next door and a little effort now on the US part might forestall a much larger fight later when the cost will be much much higher in both blood, treasure and world economic stability. What I want though is more nations with the US before we launch any missiles and other nations to provide the boots that have to go into Syria to clean up the mess later.

Edit

Hopefully the right decisions are made. I just can’t see a strike doing that. Even if the tide is tipped the way of the rebels, who says they are going to be a better bunch in control?

I’m sorry…my mistake! Nooobody saw it coming…noobody failed and everybody was kept safe!


This was for the President only and there is no way Dick Cheney would have seen it or known anything about it! How could I make such a grave omission? I mean it isn’t like I do something stoopid like homework before I post my claims!

.

I edited my post after seeing how this could down the deep end, but here we go…

Since we like to point the finger, I’m going to blame Clinton. He could have killed Osama in 1999, so I say it’s all his fault. Clinton wanted us to get bombed so we could spread our empire and get that oil.

Also, we all know it was Ramzi Yousef’s (the guy who bombed the WTC in 93) uncle, Khalid Shaikh who was the prime architect of 9/11. Again what did Clinton do about that?

That paper does not say much. People failed yes, many times, not just under bush. Here are a few examples, i can get many more. Just because one created the most causalities does not validate a conspiracy. Also, these incidents under bush happened very early on in his presidency, and should be blamed more on the Clinton administration.

1983 Beirut barracks bombing
1993 WTC
1998 United States embassy bombings (223 dead) — clinton
USS Cole

Lone_Star…I’m gonna leave your original words. I think it is a very important point to make at how this nation was led for too many years by men with not so deeply hidden agendas of ambition and avarice but today we need to make decisions based on the situation now and not on past mistakes.

and you are completely correct that Clinton also FAILED to protect the US…never said for one minute that he didn’t or that Democrats are perfect. Believe me, I hate them too but just not as much! In Washington today, everybody is guilty and has at least a little blood on their hands! You might recall me recently shredding Obama for FAILING to have any maritime policy whatsoever and stacking his cabinet with utter cronies without any qualifications for the jobs they fill.

So we “take out” the Assad clan. What next? The “rebels” are committing atrocities, too.

Same old story, rinse and repeat.

[QUOTE=catherder;118778]So we “take out” the Assad clan. What next? The “rebels” are committing atrocities, too.

Same old story, rinse and repeat.[/QUOTE]

You’re right, it is a mess and we all have a big problem. I think for once Turkey should carry some water. At least the Syrian people might tolerate Turks on the ground in their country until a stable democratic government can be elected. I don’t know if there is old animosity against Turks in Syria dating back to the Ottoman Empire but they would have to be better than Americans on the ground. Of course, an international NATO coalition would be good too. No matter what, we need to for once try to make friends with the people and not be their enemy. Look at how the Arab spring turned out in Egypt? It is worse now because the people hate the US for supporting Mubarak for 30 years and the military only stays in power by stepping on top of Islamists who only want to see the US influence go!

Again, things are a mess but we can’t leave them a mess forever there. At some point some one has to start mending fences and getting the people over there to want us and our help. I don’t know how we ended up being hated so much but we really are loathed in that part of the world!

      • Updated - - -

[QUOTE=Lone_Star;118775]1983 Beirut barracks bombing[/QUOTE]

If memory serves me correctly, Reagan was president when that happened. Wasn’t he a Republican?

[QUOTE=Lone_Star;118775]Also, these incidents under bush happened very early on in his presidency, and should be blamed more on the Clinton administration.[/QUOTE]

For GOD’S SAKE MAN…you’re in the maritime industry and you know full well you don’t get to blame the other guy when it happens on your watch! You don’t take over the watch until you are briefed and ready to assume responsibility!

[B]If U.S. Strikes Syria, Destroyers Likely To Deliver The Blow
[/B]
WASHINGTON, Aug 28 (Reuters) - If U.S. President Barack Obama decides to take military action against Syria for using chemical weapons in its two-year-old civil war, the initial blows likely would be delivered by four U.S. guided missile destroyers currently in the Mediterranean.

Beyond that, the president has a number of other ships and aircraft, both in the region and elsewhere, that he could use to carry out limited strikes to send a message aimed at deterring further chemical weapons use.

In the event of a decision to carry out strikes against Syria, European allies like Britain and France are likely to support the effort using their own stand-off weapons like the jointly developed SCALP/Storm Shadow air-launched cruise missile.

Following are some of the U.S. military assets at Obama’s disposal:

GUIDED MISSILE DESTROYERS - The United States has four guided missile destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean Sea - the USS Gravely, the USS Barry, the USS Ramage and the USS Mahan. The ships can carry a maximum of 90 to 96 Tomahawk cruise missiles if loaded only with those weapons. The actual number they are carrying at any time depends on the mission and what other weapons and systems are needed. Tomahawk missiles are likely to be the weapon of choice if Obama orders a strike on Syria because they have a range of about 1,000 miles (1,610 km) and can be used at a distance without a concerted effort to destroy Syria’s integrated air defenses.

SUBMARINES - The United States has 58 submarines capable of launching Tomahawk cruise missiles, including four specifically designated guided missile submarines capable of carrying up to 154 missiles apiece. The Navy does not discuss the whereabouts of its submarines, but one or more could be tapped for duty if Obama decides to carry out targeted strikes against Syria.

AIRCRAFT - U.S. B-1, B-2 and B-52 bombers are capable of carrying conventional air-launched cruise missiles. Those could be called into play if needed, as they have been in previous conflicts in the Middle East, flying from bases in the United States or elsewhere. The air-launched cruise missiles also are stand-off weapons that could be dropped from outside Syrian territory.

AIRCRAFT CARRIERS - The USS Harry S. Truman is currently in the northern Arabian Sea and the USS Nimitz is in the Indian Ocean. Aircraft from the two carriers could be called into service if needed to participate in an attack against Syria. But their participation appears unlikely. U.S. officials have indicated any strikes against Syria are likely to be limited in scope. Use of aircraft from the carriers would probably require a broader operation involving a U.S. effort to destroy Syria’s integrated air defenses before sending planes over the country. The Nimitz has been supporting U.S. operations in Afghanistan and is due to be replaced by the Truman, which is crossing the Arabian Sea to relieve the Nimitz so it can return home.

AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT SHIP - The USS Kearsarge just ended a port call in the Gulf and is headed back out to sea. The vessel has a contingent of Marines but is not considered likely to participate in limited operations like the ones Obama is reported to be considering.

ADDITIONAL AIRCRAFT AT BASES IN THE REGION - The United States has additional aircraft at different bases in the region that could support an operation against Syria if needed. But that is not seen as likely because it would require a much larger effort to remove the threat of Syria’s air defenses. (Reporting by David Alexander; Editing by Karey Van Hall and Jim Loney)

If memory serves me correctly, Reagan was president when that happened. Wasn’t he a Republican?

Yes, notice my point was that “people fail”, and tragic events happen from both parties. That is all i’m trying to say. Take a look at Clinton’s “Able Danger” and the USS Cole and 9/11. Something similar could be said there. I’m just trying to bring the full picture in scope here.

For GOD’S SAKE MAN…you’re in the maritime industry and you know full well you don’t get to blame the other guy when it happens on your watch! You don’t take over the watch until you are briefed and ready to assume responsibility!

Very true, but I would say this was more of a crew change, and the turnover notes were lacking to say the least.
"Congressman Weldon asserted that an Able Danger chart produced in 1999 identifying 9/11 hijackers Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmihad been presented to then-Deputy National Security Advisor Jim Steinberg. On September 15, 2005, Weldon asserted that he had identified an employee who had been ordered to destroy the 2.5 terabytes (TB) of data collected by Able Danger two years before the 9/11 attack. (Countdown to Terror)

Now we are going off the deep end…

[QUOTE=“c.captain;118725”]And certain pet chimp president once upon a time was reading “My Pet Goat”[/QUOTE]

I say he did the right thing. Why should he stop reading and scare those kids because some planes hit the towers? It’s not like there was anything he could have done anyway.

Also, that report you posted was very vague about possible threats. Do you have anything more conclusive than a report that says “they hate us and every few years try to bomb us”?

he could simply have said “excuse me kids, there is some business I need to take care of as President…your teacher will finish the story” A command decision without any alarm whatsoever

Also, that report you posted was very vague about possible threats. Do you have anything more conclusive than a report that says “they hate us and every few years try to bomb us”?

oh, I would like to think the entire US intelligence community had just a little more than what was in that briefing document…hmmm? The FBI already was on that Saudi asshole taking the flight lessons in Minnesota…could have checked a few other flight schools around the country maybe to see if there were others…perhaps?