• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Obama's air strike plans in disarray after Britain rejects use of force in Syria

Which is not to say I think this is a win for the US or anything, I just don't buy that it's a win for Assad, it seems more like the lesser of potentially bad outcomes at that point.
 
avalon said:
His family spent three decades amassing chemical weapons and he didn’t participate in any treaties that would make him give them up. Now he has to turn them over because his ally, that he is completely dependent on, told him to.

Better outcome? Any that lets him carry on as usual without getting bombed, really. Political turmoil in the US over the approval of an attack that put any on hold and took the attention off of Syria. World pressure to back off. Russia pushing the US back with military threats.

If Assad did use chemical weapons, what is the point of using them, other than a display of strength? And now that strength is being very publically taken away.

And that doesn’t get into the claim that the rebels set off the chemical weapons. THAT would be a major problem, if true.
Click to expand...

I think these are valid points. I think it is very likely he "gives up" his WMDs and somehow manages to lose a bunch. In the meantime he assured himself that not real outside help is going to come to the aid of his enemies.

By no means is Assad in a great situation, but considering the alternatives (us waging war against him) I think he is pretty satisfied with how it turned out.

I also think it is a possibility that he didnt set those weapons off and therefore is not too hesitant to prove that. I am it sure how likely hat possibility is but it certainly is possible.
 
Avalon, Wrongor also doesn't get that hetting Assad to give up the chemical weapons also helps us long-term no matter wins the Syrian civil war. There are elements that might use them after he leaves.

Anything positive that happens during the Obama Administration is in spite of Obama. He cannot not be responsible for anything

Wrongor thought Obama was responsible for the IRS non-scandal and heavily involved in Benghazi. Even after evidence came in proving Obama wasn't Wrongor challenged anyone who believe the testimony and the paper trails that absolved Obama.

There have been multiple stories how Obama and Putin about this situation at the G20. Of course to Wrongor, Obamna would get no credit.

Ambassador Pickering ,who personally knows all the leaders (and has worked in administrations of both parties), states the threat of force and Obama's actions are what led Putin to act in this way.

But Wrongor knows more than a person who knows all the major players, has dealt with them for decades and intimately understands the region.

Because I point this out and because it shows positive actions by Obama, Wrongor dismisses it.
 
What I want to know is how those hard-pressed British firms that sold the materials for making those biological/chemical weapons to the Syrians are going to make up the lost business? I am worried about thier poor managers and shareholders. Who's going to help them in these economic hard times?
 
Wrangor said:
I also think it is a possibility that he didnt set those weapons off and therefore is not too hesitant to prove that. I am it sure how likely hat possibility is but it certainly is possible.
Click to expand...

This part could be interesting because the alternatives are terrifying.
 
"I also think it is a possibility that he didnt set those weapons off and therefore is not too hesitant to prove that. I am it sure how likely hat possibility is but it certainly is possible."

This is pure Obama-hate. The only people who present this are Assad, Putin, Hezbollah and those who blame Obama for everything.

Do you really think Assad would let those stashes be compromised? It would be irrational for him not to put his top people on the guarding of the chemical weapons.

This was a large scale event. They would have had to take over a major cache of weapons deep in Assad territory and then understand how to target only their own people. It's amazing anyone would think this is possible.

For this to be true, Obama would have to convince Hagel (a conservative Republican) and Kerry to out and out lie to Congress about the emails, orders and other documents they had.

Further, they would have to get all Members of Congress who have seen them to lie about it. Many of those Members detest Obama. If these were lies, they would be the first to find microphones.

Basically, you are calling Hagel and Kerry boldfaced liars in their Congressional testimony. There is no other alternative to have a 1/1000 of 1% chance for your "possibility" to be true.
 
RJKarl said:
"I also think it is a possibility that he didnt set those weapons off and therefore is not too hesitant to prove that. I am it sure how likely hat possibility is but it certainly is possible."

This is pure Obama-hate. The only people who present this are Assad, Putin, Hezbollah and those who blame Obama for everything.

Do you really think Assad would let those stashes be compromised? It would be irrational for him not to put his top people on the guarding of the chemical weapons.

This was a large scale event. They would have had to take over a major cache of weapons deep in Assad territory and then understand how to target only their own people. It's amazing anyone would think this is possible.

For this to be true, Obama would have to convince Hagel (a conservative Republican) and Kerry to out and out lie to Congress about the emails, orders and other documents they had.

Further, they would have to get all Members of Congress who have seen them to lie about it. Many of those Members detest Obama. If these were lies, they would be the first to find microphones.

Basically, you are calling Hagel and Kerry boldfaced liars in their Congressional testimony. There is no other alternative to have a 1/1000 of 1% chance for your "possibility" to be true.
Click to expand...

This from the crowd that blamed President Bush for a hurricane.

Also, it's not fair to say that anyone would call Kerry a "boldfaced [sic] liar". I mean, no one would ever mistake him for being bold in any regard.
 
RJKarl said:
"I also think it is a possibility that he didnt set those weapons off and therefore is not too hesitant to prove that. I am it sure how likely hat possibility is but it certainly is possible."

This is pure Obama-hate. The only people who present this are Assad, Putin, Hezbollah and those who blame Obama for everything.

Do you really think Assad would let those stashes be compromised? It would be irrational for him not to put his top people on the guarding of the chemical weapons.

This was a large scale event. They would have had to take over a major cache of weapons deep in Assad territory and then understand how to target only their own people. It's amazing anyone would think this is possible.

For this to be true, Obama would have to convince Hagel (a conservative Republican) and Kerry to out and out lie to Congress about the emails, orders and other documents they had.

Further, they would have to get all Members of Congress who have seen them to lie about it. Many of those Members detest Obama. If these were lies, they would be the first to find microphones.

Basically, you are calling Hagel and Kerry boldfaced liars in their Congressional testimony. There is no other alternative to have a 1/1000 of 1% chance for your "possibility" to be true.
Click to expand...

Would you please just STFU and crawl in a hole somewhere and argue with yourself. I vowed never to put anyone on ignore because I think it is beneficial to hear arguments you disagree with more than arguments you agree with. However, you are just a broken record. Please stop posting.
 
Sgt Hulka said:
Would you please just STFU and crawl in a hole somewhere and argue with yourself. I vowed never to put anyone on ignore because I think it is beneficial to hear arguments you disagree with more than arguments you agree with. However, you are just a broken record. Please stop posting.
Click to expand...

Ignore function is awesome until people start quoting him and the urge to rebut idiocy be domes almost overwhelming. It is easier for some people to say hate when disagreement is the reality. I don't hate Obama in the least. In fact I kind if like him. I wish he would have been a better president but the guy likes brewing beer, playing basketball, and has great music taste. I would hang out with the big O anytime regardless of his stature. Just seems like an awesome dude who coincidentally married an awesome wife.

RJ is terrible however.
 
i propose we all put rj on ignore. every single last one of us.
 
Wrangor said:
Ignore function is awesome until people start quoting him and the urge to rebut idiocy be domes almost overwhelming. It is easier for some people to say hate when disagreement is the reality. I don't hate Obama in the least. In fact I kind if like him. I wish he would have been a better president but the guy likes brewing beer, playing basketball, and has great music taste. I would hang out with the big O anytime regardless of his stature. Just seems like an awesome dude who coincidentally married an awesome wife.

RJ is terrible however.
Click to expand...

Real nice....
 
Can't defend his position so he attacks and then hides....after being coaxed by the unapologetic user of Nazi propoganda.
 
RJKarl said:
Can't defend his position so he attacks and then hides....after being coaxed by the unapologetic user of Nazi propoganda.
Click to expand...

How many posters do you have on ignore again?
 
Jon Stewart just destroyed the Wrongor's of the world about the silliness of their position.
 
RJKarl said:
Of course he has me on ignore so that he doesn't have to admit being wrong again.
Click to expand...

avatar158_4.gif
 
RJKarl said:
UN disputes Wrongor's assertion that someone other than Assad launched the attack:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/world/europe/syria-united-nations.html?_r=0

Of course he has me on ignore so that he doesn't have to admit being wrong again.

Someone should copy this link....I can't to see him dance away from this one.
Click to expand...

Don't be nonsensical. Just because there is good reason to think that the government's soldiers launched the gas attack that hardly constitutes proof that Assad ordered the attack. This problem has been noted before but I guess it is just another one of the many things that you appear to have missed.
 
sailordeac said:
Don't be nonsensical. Just because there is good reason to think that the government's soldiers launched the gas attack that hardly constitutes proof that Assad ordered the attack.
Click to expand...

WHY DO YOU LIE?!?!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top