bym051d
I AM VERY IMPORTANT
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 39,329
- Reaction score
- 5,090
Shouldn't a bunch of people in the White House know that already?
it does seem odd to me that the broadest consensus seems to be "we have a lunatic ignorant baby that's president, but i agree with his decision to shoot missiles"
it does seem odd to me that the broadest consensus seems to be "we have a lunatic ignorant baby that's president, but i agree with his decision to shoot missiles"
it does seem odd to me that the broadest consensus seems to be "we have a lunatic ignorant baby that's president, but i agree with his decision to shoot missiles"
Not to mention it was an erratic 180 from his position from days prior. Which is probably a good indication that he hasn't thought through what comes next.
Which hundreds of people on both sides did 4 years ago which resulted in a diplomatic approach. The goal should be to seek some equilibrium with Assad. Not easy, but more plausible than finding a workable replacement.
Ted Cruz: We should be focused on defending the United States of America. That’s why young men and women sign up to join the military, not to, as you know, serve as Al Qaeda’s air force.
Johnny Isakson: After carefully weighing this very important issue, I have decided that I will vote against the resolution to authorize a U.S. military strike in Syria. Over the past week, I have traveled my state and have talked personally to hundreds of Georgians. Thousands more constituents have contacted my office by phone and email. It is clear to me that Georgians overwhelmingly oppose our country getting involved militarily in Syria. The administration’s lack of a clear strategy is troubling, and the potential fallout following a military strike is also troubling.
Which hundreds of people on both sides did 4 years ago which resulted in a diplomatic approach. The goal should be to seek some equilibrium with Assad. Not easy, but more plausible than finding a workable replacement.
better question is why is Russia shooting down our missiles?
Which hundreds of people on both sides did 4 years ago which resulted in a diplomatic approach. The goal should be to seek some equilibrium with Assad. Not easy, but more plausible than finding a workable replacement.
Maybe seems odd, but it's stone cold lock 100% legal for Russia to defend Syria from our attack as long as Syria asks them to. Way more legal than us attacking Syria in the first place (which probably violated international law)
an approach that didn't work
What will work?
Russia to tell Assad to stop bombing his own people, probably. Or Russia to occupy Syria. I don't know, but let's not pretend previous plans worked out.
Nobody did.
Which hundreds of people on both sides did 4 years ago which resulted in a diplomatic approach. The goal should be to seek some equilibrium with Assad. Not easy, but more plausible than finding a workable replacement.
Not to mention it was an erratic 180 from his position from days prior. Which is probably a good indication that he hasn't thought through what comes next.