House of Commons says

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by buckman

I don't consider Beohner or McCain mainstream GOP by any stretch. I don't think the resolution will pass . After yesterday's hearings...holy sheet, is our leadership a mess
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You truly believe Paul and Cruz are the mainstream then?

I'm very torn on this issue.
On one hand, we should stay the F out of the middle east. on the other, they used chemical weapons, and that's a line that can't be crossed without repercussions... I really can't decide where I stand on this one...

[buckman]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

You truly believe Paul and Cruz are the mainstream then?

I'm very torn on this issue.
On one hand, we should stay the F out of the middle east. on the other, they used chemical weapons, and that's a line that can't be crossed without repercussions... I really can't decide where I stand on this one...

They used them before this time and Iraq did too. Hate to see world war 3 started over this . Then what? He lines up 1k people and machine guns them. So we only go in because of the means by which they were killed?
And yes , I do believe the latter two do have more in common with conservative believes .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

whatever happened to sitting down with these dictators over tea, without any pre-conditions and fixing these problems without having to resort to military action?

wasn't long ago that Pelosi, O, Kerry, Clinton and others were telling us that Assad was brilliant, highly educated, a reformer who would fundamentally change his country, Hope & Change for Syria or something....guess we never learn

best quote of the weekend by one of the befuddled sycophant media types on one of the big three propaganda outlets ...."after making his statement in the Rose Garden, the President played a round of golf"

yup.....

Nero Fiddled
Zero Golfs

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

I really can't decide where I stand on this one...

I agree 100%.

On the one hand, this guy has killed tens of thousands of civilians with bullets. But we are only willing to attack when 1,000 more are killed with gas, and that's that much worse than killing a larger number of children with guns?

On the other hand, I do believe that the strong have the responsibility to protect the weak, and if no one else can save these kids, is it not worth doing? But then again, if we kill/remove Assad, there's no way of knowing that whoever replaces him, won't do the same thing to his political opponents?

It's a mess. That part of the world is a godawful mess. Very difficult to know what the right thing to do is. But when I was in the Marines, all I ever prayed for, was a worthwhile mission. Trying to save inncocent civilians is about as noble as it gets. But peace, at least lasting peace, doesn't seem to work in that part of the world.

I had a colonel who used to say, "as long as those people hate each other more than they love their own children, there can be no possible peace." I guess that just about sums it up.