How would you vote in Congress on a m...
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#41 Sep 4, 2013
>
>
The "catalyst" for the regional war was provided by bush the w's "prideful vengeance" when he went after Saddam for his attempt on Bush the Sr's life.

Hussein, despicable as he was, was a somewhat stabilizing force in the Middle East and his absence has given rise to much turmoil in the region.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#42 Sep 4, 2013
>
>
It is un F'n believable that the same folks who never batted an eye lash when a million innocent Iraqi civilians were slaughtered by bush the w's "shock and awe" are now in arms over President OBAMA's plan to bomb BASHAR Al-ASSAD's military resources to punish/discourage him for/from gassing innocent women and children...

Boy, talk about HYPOCRITES!!!!
The right is wrong

Sacramento, CA

#43 Sep 4, 2013
Local wrote:
Beaten again, heh dummy? I can always tell when you are whipped as you change the subject.
There is nothing to be gained by bombing Syria, except perhaps satisfying nobama's prideful vengence.
Assad will still have chemical weapons capabilities, only now, he will not hesitate to use them as he has NOTHING TO LOSE. His days as "king" are numbered as soon as the U.S. strikes.
Israel will probably be the recipients of a vengeful retaliation.
Assad knows that eventually he(and his family) will be killed by the cut throat muslim zealots that will take over Syria. He truly has nothing to lose by starting THE regional war that will ultimately follow........I think that it was always in the cards(a regional war)......but I never thought that a U.S. Pres. would be the one to provide THE big catalyst to get it going.
Hello freak -job! you asked an open ended question so my response wasn't changing the subject.

Just to prove you're an idiot: Please post a link showing that Obama wants to start another was! Before you post your normal crap, look up the meanings of "need to" and "want to".
Steve

Chico, CA

#44 Sep 4, 2013
Russia is sending three more ships to the eastern Mediterranean to bolster its fleet there as a U.S. Senate panel will consider President Barack Obama’s request for authority to conduct a military strike on Syria.

Russia is sending two destroyers, including the Nastoichivy, the flagship of the Baltic Fleet, and the Moskva missile cruiser to the region. That follows last week’s dispatch of a reconnaissance ship to the eastern Mediterranean, four days after the deployment of an anti-submarine ship and a missile cruiser to the area. Syria hosts Russia’s only military facility outside the former Soviet Union, at the port of Tartus.
Steve

Chico, CA

#45 Sep 4, 2013
I didn’t set a red line,” Mr. Obama said during a news conference here in Stockholm.“The world set a red line.”

He added,“My credibility’s not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line. And America and Congress’s credibility is on the line.”
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#46 Sep 4, 2013
>
>
The world did "set a red line" when it outlawed the use of poison gases and biological agents back in 1925 and....

President OBAMA is correct, " America's and Congress's credibility is on the line"
Local

Hidden Valley Lake, CA

#47 Sep 4, 2013
I see that the chickenhawk lefties on this forum have taken nobama's spinroom talking points and reguritated them here.
LOL
These are the same arsewipes that bashed our former president for going to war over many of the same issues......and now, the democrat senate leadership has even voted to go to war.
Lobbing even ONE bomb at anyone is an act of war.
and in this case.....we are not even sure who used the WMD...was it Assad? or was it the radical muslims who want to take over Syria?
Russia is moving warships to the area, the Saudi's want to pay us like mercenaries to bomb assad, and China is sitting back laughing at the entire mess.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09...
Local

Hidden Valley Lake, CA

#48 Sep 4, 2013
Steve wrote:
Russia is sending three more ships to the eastern Mediterranean to bolster its fleet there as a U.S. Senate panel will consider President Barack Obama’s request for authority to conduct a military strike on Syria.
Russia is sending two destroyers, including the Nastoichivy, the flagship of the Baltic Fleet, and the Moskva missile cruiser to the region. That follows last week’s dispatch of a reconnaissance ship to the eastern Mediterranean, four days after the deployment of an anti-submarine ship and a missile cruiser to the area. Syria hosts Russia’s only military facility outside the former Soviet Union, at the port of Tartus.
Putin is a pro....and he is a hardliner.
Nobama is wayyyyyy over his head dealing with that guy.
This recent nobama chaotic mess has disaster written all over it.
I hope that Congress has the moral fortitude to tell obama......no!!!!

No more wars. We are war weary and broke.
Where the hell is the U.N.?
I thought that THIS kind of a situation is what they are for?
The right is wrong

Lincoln, CA

#49 Sep 4, 2013
Local wrote:
Beaten again, heh dummy? I can always tell when you are whipped as you change the subject.
There is nothing to be gained by bombing Syria, except perhaps satisfying nobama's prideful vengence.
Assad will still have chemical weapons capabilities, only now, he will not hesitate to use them as he has NOTHING TO LOSE. His days as "king" are numbered as soon as the U.S. strikes.
Israel will probably be the recipients of a vengeful retaliation.
Assad knows that eventually he(and his family) will be killed by the cut throat muslim zealots that will take over Syria. He truly has nothing to lose by starting THE regional war that will ultimately follow........I think that it was always in the cards(a regional war)......but I never thought that a U.S. Pres. would be the one to provide THE big catalyst to get it going.
Hello freak -job! you asked an open ended question so my response wasn't changing the subject.

Just to prove you're an idiot: Please post a link showing that Obama wants to start another was! Before you post your normal crap, look up the meanings of "need to" and "want to".
Local

Hidden Valley Lake, CA

#50 Sep 4, 2013
The right is wrong wrote:
<quoted text>
Hello freak -job! you asked an open ended question so my response wasn't changing the subject.
Just to prove you're an idiot: Please post a link showing that Obama wants to start another was! Before you post your normal crap, look up the meanings of "need to" and "want to".
wassup dummy
Launch one bomb, and that is an act of war.
Nobama does not NEED to launch bombs at Syria, he WANTS to launch bombs at Syria. America is in no more jeopardy now than we were before the chemical attacks launched by radical muslims(on their own people).
There may be others who want to launch bombs at Syria, but they are smart enough to just back off of this nightmare........
nobama must either declare war on Syria, or quiet his big mouth.
His "red line in the sand" comment was very, very amatuerish.
You don't threaten radical muslim lunatics....you either go after them(declare war) or you don't.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#51 Sep 4, 2013
>
>
You deal with radical muslims the same way you deal with zealots, first you set boundaries on them and if they cross them you kick their butts because that's the only thing they seem to understand.

Radical muslims are not exempt from international laws and conventions just by virtue of being lunatics.
FYI

Chico, CA

#52 Sep 4, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
>
>
You deal with radical muslims the same way you deal with zealots, first you set boundaries on them and if they cross them you kick their butts because that's the only thing they seem to understand.
Radical muslims are not exempt from international laws and conventions just by virtue of being lunatics.
On December 5, 2012 the US House of Representatives passed legislation approved earlier by the US Senate removing the word "lunatic" from all federal laws in the United States. President Obama is expected to sign this legislation.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#53 Sep 4, 2013
FYI wrote:
<quoted text>
On December 5, 2012 the US House of Representatives passed legislation approved earlier by the US Senate removing the word "lunatic" from all federal laws in the United States. President Obama is expected to sign this legislation.
>
>
LOL

At least the word Idiot still remains...
The right is wrong

Lincoln, CA

#54 Sep 4, 2013
Local wrote:
<quoted text>
wassup dummy
Launch one bomb, and that is an act of war.
Nobama does not NEED to launch bombs at Syria, he WANTS to launch bombs at Syria. America is in no more jeopardy now than we were before the chemical attacks launched by radical muslims(on their own people).
There may be others who want to launch bombs at Syria, but they are smart enough to just back off of this nightmare........
nobama must either declare war on Syria, or quiet his big mouth.
His "red line in the sand" comment was very, very amatuerish.
You don't threaten radical muslim lunatics....you either go after them(declare war) or you don't.
Just to prove you're an idiot: Please post a link showing that Obama wants to start another was! Before you post your normal crap, look up the meanings of "need to" and "want to".

Can't do it can you there is no link proving Obama wants to start a war. So easy to prove you're a liar.
Local

Hidden Valley Lake, CA

#55 Sep 4, 2013
The right is wrong wrote:
<quoted text>
Just to prove you're an idiot: Please post a link showing that Obama wants to start another was! Before you post your normal crap, look up the meanings of "need to" and "want to".
Can't do it can you there is no link proving Obama wants to start a war. So easy to prove you're a liar.
Hey you lil dummy...

act of war
noun
an act of aggression by a country against another....
an aggressive act, usually employing military force,

Unless you think launching a missle(bomb) is not an act of aggression?
If not, please explain. lololol
Obama WANTS to do "an act of war".

only an idiot doesn't understand that.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#56 Sep 5, 2013
>
>
In this case launching a missile is not as much an act of aggression as it is providing a valuable civics lesson to someone who thinks he can gas his own people with total impunity.
The right is wrong

Lincoln, CA

#57 Sep 5, 2013
Local wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey you lil dummy...
act of war
noun
an act of aggression by a country against another....
an aggressive act, usually employing military force,
Unless you think launching a missle(bomb) is not an act of aggression?
If not, please explain. lololol
Obama WANTS to do "an act of war".
only an idiot doesn't understand that.
You know, I'm starting to feel sorry for you. You don't understand what others say and you don't understand the words you use.

I've never questioned whether striking another country with a projectile is an act of war.

The question is the meaning of the word "wants" verses "needs". Please post a link showing that Obama "wants" to start a war.
Local

Hidden Valley Lake, CA

#58 Sep 5, 2013
The right is wrong wrote:
<quoted text>
You know, I'm starting to feel sorry for you. You don't understand what others say and you don't understand the words you use.
I've never questioned whether striking another country with a projectile is an act of war.
The question is the meaning of the word "wants" verses "needs". Please post a link showing that Obama "wants" to start a war.
I will let the facts speak for themselves, you lil dummy.

Neocons outraged that Obama WANTS democratic approval for war
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line...

Obama Wants To Have A War : Facts Don’t Matter
Obama Wants To Have A War : Facts Don’t Matter

Obama Wants Syria War
http://www.usanewsfirst.com/2013/08/24/obama-...

Barack Obama Wants His War & Won’t Give Up Until He Gets It

http://dcclothesline.com/2013/07/28/barack-ob...

ROTFLMAO
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#59 Sep 5, 2013
>
>
You are losing it, dummy...!!!
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#60 Sep 5, 2013
The right is wrong wrote:
<quoted text>
You know, I'm starting to feel sorry for you. You don't understand what others say and you don't understand the words you use.
I've never questioned whether striking another country with a projectile is an act of war.
The question is the meaning of the word "wants" verses "needs". Please post a link showing that Obama "wants" to start a war.
>
>
LOCO is going really LOCO...!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Richvale Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
RepubliKLANS FATAL Attraction with D J TRUMP th... 2 min a-citizen 16
TRUMP Drained the DC SWAMP to find his Cabinet ... 1 hr GREATjobDONNIE 1
Peeping Democrats 3 hr Gossip 1
News Joshua Tree man jailed for fatal shooting of fr... (Apr '10) 4 hr Tobi 20
Trumps Inflationary Economic Poicies to SKYROCK... 5 hr Tents4Rent 1
Trump to start Income Taxes at $10,000 rather t... 5 hr LoveFEST 1
Hey Donald, Pay me Millions and I willl only mo... 6 hr PayME 1

Richvale Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Richvale Mortgages