"Imminent threat"

[jimnyc]

So how many people, on this board, and my old board, stated that we should NEVER be involved in a war unless there is an imminent threat to our country involved? I can recall about 20 of these people by memory, but would have to search for an exact picture. Then how many politicians said the same or extremely similar? How many of the protesting anti-war nuts said the same? Code Pink? Endless amount of Democrat party supporters? I could go on and on...

My question is - where are they now?

[jimnyc]

A trip down memory lane. Anyone can do a search on these members with "imminent threat". I'm too lazy to quote and give links. Funny stuff! I wonder where they are all bitching and parading at with their protests?

Jillian
LiberalNation
Loosecannon
Guernicaa
Psychoblues
lily
John Doe
bullypulpit
JoeSteel
Moderate Democrat aka Maineman aka Manfrommaine aka Virgil

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So how many people, on this board, and my old board, stated that we should NEVER be involved in a war unless there is an imminent threat to our country involved? I can recall about 20 of these people by memory, but would have to search for an exact picture. Then how many politicians said the same or extremely similar? How many of the protesting anti-war nuts said the same? Code Pink? Endless amount of Democrat party supporters? I could go on and on...

My question is - where are they now? Where indeed??? Seems all Obama had to do was cloak his desire in a false charge then claim humanitarian action was called for. Just a mere coincidence that this sudden humanitarian action will aid the Terrorist groups that are now the leadership of the rebels fighting in Syria. A mere coincidence that yet again Obama is supporting known and designated enemies of this nation! And by doing so is breaking a Federal law that forbids doing exactly that! I hope Congress tells the bastard hell no and he does it anyways. If that happens we sure enough will have a Constitutional crisis IMHO!!!!! The bastard is just arrogant enough to go ahead even if Congress clearly says no! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- However , I've wondered this about Syrian strike proposal coming to this. What if it's by design? What if he has steered it to a Congressional vote knowing Congress will say no. Then he ever so graciously abides by that NO- vote! AND WHY YOU MAY ASK WOULD HE DO THAT? FIRST--- So that then he has his almost invincible premade --EXCUSE- not to aid Israel in striking Iran to stop it's nuke program by pointing to that vote!! Of course he is too damn stupid to have ever thought up such a devious long range plan but undoubtedly his masters are not IMHO.. SECONDLY, to reestablish his not overriding Congressional authority which could be a big campaign issue in the coming 2014 election. Thereby negating one of the weapons that can be used against him and the Dem party in that election . For a major call in the 2014 election will be to retake the Senate and control both houses in Congress because Obama's abuse of power is greatly due to a divided Congress and the Senate backing Obama against the House of Representatives.. -Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

A trip down memory lane. Anyone can do a search on these members with "imminent threat". I'm too lazy to quote and give links. Funny stuff! I wonder where they are all bitching and parading at with their protests?

Jillian
LiberalNation
Loosecannon
Guernicaa
Psychoblues
lily
John Doe
bullypulpit
JoeSteel
Moderate Democrat aka Maineman aka Manfrommaine aka Virgil How about any current members here? Are there still some here that were in that camp back then? I am sure a few inquiring minds here would like to know.;)-Tyr

[jimnyc]

How about any current members here? Are there still some here that were in that camp back then? I am sure a few inquiring minds here would like to know.;)-Tyr

The only current one I can think of, and I'm literally just guessing, would be Revelarts. But in his defense, while he may stated as much in the past, I'm confident his stance applies to both parties.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The only current one I can think of, and I'm literally just guessing, would be Revelarts. But in his defense, while he may stated as much in the past, I'm confident his stance applies to both parties. ahh, crap... say it aint so!!! I like the Rev.... tell me he is a changed man... please...:confused: --Tyr

[hjmick]

I'll state right here for the record...


We should not involve ourselves in the clusterfuck that is Syria.


I did not support the decision to go into Iraq.


Afghanistan I was cool with.


Now, if that qualifies me for the camp as described above, so be it.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

When are these dumbasses going to stop citing that it was used as evidence that Assad did it? Proving a bank was robbed is not proving who did it but that's how they and the media present it to the public. Check this out. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/kerry-us-evidence-sarin-gas-syria-20129539 Citing Sarin Use, US Seeks to Bolster Syria CaseWASHINGTON September 1, 2013 (AP)
By BRADLEY KLAPPER Associated Press <!-- -->
<iframe name="fb_xdm_frame_http" title="Facebook Cross Domain Communication Frame" id="fb_xdm_frame_http" aria-hidden="true" src="http://static.ak.facebook.com/connect/xd_arbiter.php?version=26#channel=f1e3353ab4b5c3e&channel_path=%2Fassets%2Fstatic%2Fperm_cache%2Fcha nnel.html%3Ffb_xd_fragment%23xd_sig%3Df2adfb70ca89 2e8%26&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fabcnews.go.com" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="border: currentColor;" allowtransparency="true" tab-index="-1"></iframe><iframe name="fb_xdm_frame_https" title="Facebook Cross Domain Communication Frame" id="fb_xdm_frame_https" aria-hidden="true" src="https://s-static.ak.facebook.com/connect/xd_arbiter.php?version=26#channel=f1e3353ab4b5c3e&channel_path=%2Fassets%2Fstatic%2Fperm_cache%2Fcha nnel.html%3Ffb_xd_fragment%23xd_sig%3Df2adfb70ca89 2e8%26&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fabcnews.go.com" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="border: currentColor;" allowtransparency="true" tab-index="-1"></iframe>




<div class="ad-728x90" id="banner-0" "=""><div class="adslug"><!--AD--></div><iframe width="728" height="90" id="_fw_frame_leaderboard" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true"></iframe> </div>

Citing Sarin Use, US Seeks to Bolster Syria CaseWASHINGTON September 1, 2013 (AP)
By BRADLEY KLAPPER Associated Press


<!-- empty -->

<fb:like class="fb_edge_widget_with_comment fb_iframe_widget" width="90" show_faces="false" layout="button_count" font="arial" href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/kerry-us-evidence-sarin-gas-syria-20129539" fb-xfbml-state="rendered" send="false"></fb:like>

(javascript:void(0);)



<!-- empty //-->

<!-- empty //-->

<!-- empty -->

<!-- spacer -->
http://a.abcnews.com/assets/images/logo/AP_logo_update_20130709.gif
The Obama administration on Sunday confidently predicted congressional backing for limited military action in Syria and asserted that the Assad government used sarin gas in the deadly chemical attack that threatens to draw the U.S. into another Mideast conflict.
Senior U.S. officials sought to lay out their case to divided lawmakers in a classified briefing as the countdown began to the biggest foreign policy vote since Congress authorized President George W. Bush to invade Iraq.
In a series of interviews on the Sunday news shows, Secretary of State John Kerry said the case for intervention in Syria's 2½-year civil war was strengthening each day and that he expected American lawmakers to recognize the need for action when the "credibility of the United States is on the line."
He said President Barack Obama has the authority to launch retaliatory strikes with or without Congress' approval, but Kerry stopped short of saying the president would do so if the House or Senate withholds support.
"The stakes are just really too high here," Kerry said. "We are not going to lose this vote."
Seeking to sharpen the argument for war, Kerry said the United States has received hair and blood samples from first responders indicating that Syria's government forces used sarin in its Aug. 21 attack in the Damascus suburbs.
It was the first piece of specific physiological evidence cited by the administration, which previously cited only an unnamed nerve agent in the killing of 1,429 civilians, including more than 400 children. The U.S. says such chemical weapons use compels an international response. (1. Note-- Which would only prove it was actually used, nothing more!!--Tyr)
Washington has struggled to rally allies to its cause, however, with only France firmly on board among major military powers. Stalwart ally Britain cannot be counted on after Parliament rejected using force in a vote last week. That could be a harbinger of the difficult task ahead for the Obama administration as it seeks Congress' approval for cruise missile strikes and other limited measures once lawmakers return from summer break, which is scheduled to end Sept. 9. (2. They have been beating this drum long enough , give substantial and irrefutable proof that Assad did it or stop the GD lying bastards--Tyr) ----------------------------------------------------------- Yes, they think most Americans are this damn stupid and why not(?) they voted in Obama again didn't they?

[aboutime]

Anyone ever notice how NO politician, from either Lying party, ever asks the people in the military? Namely the relatives, and friends; how they feel about involving their loved-ones in uniform in actions NOT DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO, or THREATENING TO THE U.S.A.???

[fj1200]

So how many people, on this board, and my old board, stated that we should NEVER be involved in a war unless there is an imminent threat to our country involved?

That's quite a bright line standard but not one I necessarily attribute to the liberals you mentioned; more libertarian. I think "national interest" is more of a cross-the-aisle standard though the sides may disagree on what is in our national interest. I don't think Syria much fits the bill in either case.

[fj1200]

Anyone ever notice how NO politician, from either Lying party, ever asks the people in the military? Namely the relatives, and friends; how they feel about involving their loved-ones in uniform in actions NOT DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO, or THREATENING TO THE U.S.A.???

They already answered; "I, (state your name) do..."

[aboutime]

They already answered; "I, (state your name) do..."


B.S. ... Friends, and relatives of our Military DO NOT TAKE AN OATH. But large numbers of them actually VOTE.

[fj1200]

B.S. ... Friends, and relatives of our Military DO NOT TAKE AN OATH.

True, but they do however vote for their representatives.

[aboutime]

True, but they do however vote for their representatives.


What has that got to do with the TOPIC of this thread? Which you think you have managed to distort, and change.

You really are Obama....aren't ya?

[fj1200]

What has that got to do with the TOPIC of this thread? Which you think you have managed to distort, and change.

You really are Obama....aren't ya?

You already changed the topic in post #9. Do you think relatives of military personnel deserve a higher level of say than ordinary citizens?

[aboutime]

You already changed the topic in post #9. Do you think relatives of military personnel deserve a higher level of say than ordinary citizens?

It was pertinent to the topic. You dislike that? Tough. Too bad for you, and who you think you are.

[jimnyc]

I'll state right here for the record...


We should not involve ourselves in the clusterfuck that is Syria.


I did not support the decision to go into Iraq.


Afghanistan I was cool with.


Now, if that qualifies me for the camp as described above, so be it.

Nah, the list is for those who stood against Iraq as being off limits as there was no imminent threat, but likely who now stand behind Obama and his stance on Syria. Hell, I'm admittedly behind Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. My fear in Syria though is helping Al Qaeda or other similar groups, but I would also like to see some in their government at the receiving end of a Tomahawk missile. The people I'm speaking of, are like Obama himself, who said he has the power to do this himself, bypassing congress, but in 2007 he said:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/qNUufdROKTs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Nah, the list is for those who stood against Iraq as being off limits as there was no imminent threat, but likely who now stand behind Obama and his stance on Syria. Hell, I'm admittedly behind Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. My fear in Syria though is helping Al Qaeda or other similar groups, but I would also like to see some in their government at the receiving end of a Tomahawk missile. The people I'm speaking of, are like Obama himself, who said he has the power to do this himself, bypassing congress, but in 2007 he said:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/qNUufdROKTs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>

Its a given that Assad is a bad guy but those seeking to dethrone him are far worse. He is being attacked because he is not hardline enough against Israel and certainly not enough pro-Islamic expansion. If have to chose between fighting a lion or a cougar I'm going to choose the cougar every time. ;)--Tyr

[fj1200]

It was pertinent to the topic. You dislike that? Tough. Too bad for you, and who you think you are.

Beg pardon? How is this:


Anyone ever notice how NO politician, from either Lying party, ever asks the people in the military? Namely the relatives, and friends; how they feel about involving their loved-ones in uniform in actions NOT DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO, or THREATENING TO THE U.S.A.???

pertinent to this:


So how many people, on this board, and my old board, stated that we should NEVER be involved in a war unless there is an imminent threat to our country involved? I can recall about 20 of these people by memory, but would have to search for an exact picture. Then how many politicians said the same or extremely similar? How many of the protesting anti-war nuts said the same? Code Pink? Endless amount of Democrat party supporters? I could go on and on...

My question is - where are they now?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Beg pardon? How is this:



pertinent to this:

Hardly the same fj. Friends and family almost always voice opposition to any war that's being fought for political reasons rather than necessity. Yet those same usually fully support our men and women as they do their duty. bamscum's only reason for wanting to strike Syria is his wanting the rebel terrorists to win, the (false flag) chem attack reason is bullshit. -Tyr

[fj1200]

Hardly the same fj.

I didn't think so either.

[Truth Detector]

I'll state right here for the record...


We should not involve ourselves in the clusterfuck that is Syria.


I did not support the decision to go into Iraq.


Afghanistan I was cool with.


Now, if that qualifies me for the camp as described above, so be it.

The thread premise cannot apply to you because you are consistent. It only applies to those who screeched about going into Iraq, where we had justification, but now hypocritically screech that we need to do something about Syria, where we are not justified, merely because The One says so.

Its about people who whined and ranted about pre-emptive attacks when Bush was in charge, which Iraq was not, but who now demand them because The One is in charge.

Its about the incredible hypocrisy of political posturing displayed by the hypocrite of he century, John Kerry, who was for the war, before he was against it, and who now uses the same rhetoric he impugned to demand action in a nation who has not been sanctioned by he UN and which poses no current threat to us or our allies.

[Truth Detector]

Hardly the same fj. Friends and family almost always voice opposition to any war that's being fought for political reasons rather than necessity. Yet those same usually fully support our men and women as they do their duty. bamscum's only reason for wanting to strike Syria is his wanting the rebel terrorists to win, the (false flag) chem attack reason is bullshit. -Tyr

I disagree; the only reason for the Chief Admonisher wanting to strike Syria is because of his moronic bluster about a "red line" he had no intent of enforcing then getting called on it.

No troops will be involved and the strikes will be "limited." I'm betting the Al Qaeda backed Assad regime is quaking in their little booties at this very minute thinking about it. Or rather, laughing their asses off at Obama the hustler.

[Abbey Marie]

A trip down memory lane. Anyone can do a search on these members with "imminent threat". I'm too lazy to quote and give links. Funny stuff! I wonder where they are all bitching and parading at with their protests?

Jillian
LiberalNation
Loosecannon
Guernicaa
Psychoblues
lily
John Doe
bullypulpit
JoeSteel
Moderate Democrat aka Maineman aka Manfrommaine aka Virgil


That is one twisted lane! :laugh:

[hjmick]

That is one twisted lane! :laugh:


Kind of like Lombard Street...

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I disagree; the only reason for the Chief Admonisher wanting to strike Syria is because of his moronic bluster about a "red line" he had no intent of enforcing then getting called on it.

." I'm betting the Al Qaeda backed Assad regime is quaking in their little booties at this very minute thinking about it.. You may want to rethink that comment . Al Qaeda controls the rebel forces there. Check this out .

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/19/al-qaeda-rat-line-from-syria-to-iraq-turns-back-ag/?page=all Al Qaeda ‘rat line’ from Syria to Iraq turns back against Assad Syrian President Bashar Assad’s anti-U.S. strategy during the 2003-11 Iraq War has come back to bite him.

Mr. Assad allowed al Qaeda operatives to set up a “rat line” through his country and into northeastern Iraq. Hundreds of young terrorists, many recruited from North Africa, took airline flights into Damascus and joined networks ready to sneak them across the border.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEE ALSO: American al Qaeda propagandist calls for killings of U.S. diplomats

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Assad’s objective: to keep the U.S. occupation off balance by helping al Qaeda kill Americans.

But Mr. Assad’s move also enabled al Qaeda to set up a logistics foothold in Syria that now is being used against him.

The al Qaeda-linked Al Nusra Front is conducting war on the Assad regime with a band of about 6,000 fighters established by jihadists in January 2012. It wants Mr. Assad to be replaced by a Sunni Islamic state.

Al Nusra knows how to move men and arms inside Syria to the point where, analysts say, they have become the most deadly force among a hodgepodge of opposition groups.

“Al Qaeda fighters who are back in Syria, I am confident, they are relying on much they learned in moving through Syria into Iraq for more than five years when they were waging war against the U.S. and Iraq Security Assistance Force,” said retired Army Gen. John M. Keane, an adviser to commanders in Iraq.

In fact, al Qaeda kept alive its networks in Syria, according to the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point, N.Y., which advises Washington policymakers. It notes in a May 2012 report, as jihadists streamed into Syria, “Al Qaeda has an active affiliate in neighboring Iraq that has long-standing logistical capabilities in Syria.”


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/19/al-qaeda-rat-line-from-syria-to-iraq-turns-back-ag/#ixzz2dywqHIPL
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

[CSM]

I was and still am against ANY foreign intervention in the Middle East but not because I am an anti-war, free-love, pro-abortion, tree-hugging liberal. I am, in fact, a knuckle dragging, baby-killing, capitalistic conservative. I am against any military action planned by this nation because the leadership and citizens (past and present) of this country will callously commit this nation's blood and treasure without the stomach to see the whole thing through to an objective that justifies the cost. That same leadership and citizenry is unwilling to do whatever it takes to win (heck, they cannot even define what winning conditions are for most operations). Further, the instruments ( members of the US military) they use to execute their frivolous forays are looked down upon, painted as terrorists and threats to the country and charged as criminals when they act like warriors instead of choir boys. The same leadership so willing to send men and women into harms way are the same ones that proudly cut the funding necesssary to ensure that those soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines are equipped and trained to be the best fighting force in the world .... and using those same funds to support misguided, largely ineffective liberal causes so they can feel good about themselves.

I say NO to intervention in Syria or anywhere else in the world where there is no direct and imminent threat to the US.

[Truth Detector]

You may want to rethink that comment . Al Qaeda controls the rebel forces there. Check this out .

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/19/al-qaeda-rat-line-from-syria-to-iraq-turns-back-ag/?page=all Al Qaeda ‘rat line’ from Syria to Iraq turns back against Assad Syrian President Bashar Assad’s anti-U.S. strategy during the 2003-11 Iraq War has come back to bite him.

Mr. Assad allowed al Qaeda operatives to set up a “rat line” through his country and into northeastern Iraq. Hundreds of young terrorists, many recruited from North Africa, took airline flights into Damascus and joined networks ready to sneak them across the border.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEE ALSO: American al Qaeda propagandist calls for killings of U.S. diplomats

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Assad’s objective: to keep the U.S. occupation off balance by helping al Qaeda kill Americans.

But Mr. Assad’s move also enabled al Qaeda to set up a logistics foothold in Syria that now is being used against him.

The al Qaeda-linked Al Nusra Front is conducting war on the Assad regime with a band of about 6,000 fighters established by jihadists in January 2012. It wants Mr. Assad to be replaced by a Sunni Islamic state.

Al Nusra knows how to move men and arms inside Syria to the point where, analysts say, they have become the most deadly force among a hodgepodge of opposition groups.

“Al Qaeda fighters who are back in Syria, I am confident, they are relying on much they learned in moving through Syria into Iraq for more than five years when they were waging war against the U.S. and Iraq Security Assistance Force,” said retired Army Gen. John M. Keane, an adviser to commanders in Iraq.

In fact, al Qaeda kept alive its networks in Syria, according to the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point, N.Y., which advises Washington policymakers. It notes in a May 2012 report, as jihadists streamed into Syria, “Al Qaeda has an active affiliate in neighboring Iraq that has long-standing logistical capabilities in Syria.”


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/19/al-qaeda-rat-line-from-syria-to-iraq-turns-back-ag/#ixzz2dywqHIPL
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

You are correct; I got my terrorist organizations reversed, I meant to type Hezzbolah backed Assad regime.

;)

[Truth Detector]

I was and still am against ANY foreign intervention in the Middle East but not because I am an anti-war, free-love, pro-abortion, tree-hugging liberal. I am, in fact, a knuckle dragging, baby-killing, capitalistic conservative. I am against any military action planned by this nation because the leadership and citizens (past and present) of this country will callously commit this nation's blood and treasure without the stomach to see the whole thing through to an objective that justifies the cost. That same leadership and citizenry is unwilling to do whatever it takes to win (heck, they cannot even define what winning conditions are for most operations). Further, the instruments ( members of the US military) they use to execute their frivolous forays are looked down upon, painted as terrorists and threats to the country and charged as criminals when they act like warriors instead of choir boys. The same leadership so willing to send men and women into harms way are the same ones that proudly cut the funding necesssary to ensure that those soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines are equipped and trained to be the best fighting force in the world .... and using those same funds to support misguided, largely ineffective liberal causes so they can feel good about themselves.

I say NO to intervention in Syria or anywhere else in the world where there is no direct and imminent threat to the US.

My sentiments exactly; after the media and politically motivated savagery Bush had to suffer through after immense public approval for war and the brain dead efforts of Democrats to denigrate the mission and efforts of our troops, I will never support another interventionist cause because we, the sheeple, deserve the mess we have now.

Until we, the sheeple, wake up to the reality that our nation is not an empire, it is based on justice and should be involved in policing a world filled within despots, dictators and terrorists devoted to bringing us and our allies down, no life is worth being shed for "limited" engagements that are not designed for total victory.

You want an inexperienced buffoon for President; fine, then suffer the consequences of your votes.

[aboutime]

T.D. and all. Sadly. Nothing any of us say, think, present opinions about here...MEANS ANYTHING to the politicians in Washington.

From the top, on down. Politics is nothing more than a huge game of Monopoly members of Congress, and Obama are playing. And WE THE PEOPLE are nothing but those tiny little pieces to be moved around at the direction of Politicians who always walk away...having spent our money, while we just fold the board, and put it back in the box till the next time Politicians NEED our votes.