“It's comong.”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#1 Jun 15, 2013
Our boys and girls in Washington are telling us about chemical use by their leadership. Do we help? Hell no. Anything we do would be wrong. Best solution is to pull the foreign aid. Especially to rebels.

“Master o Public Administration”

Since: Oct 10

St. Marys, GA

#2 Jun 15, 2013
Do you have the right country? Syria, maybe?

“Commander & Chef”

Since: Sep 11

Saint Marys, GA

#3 Jun 15, 2013
Both sides in Syria need to lose big. The best thing for us, US, would be massive casualties among both groups of fighters. (not civilians)
JNL

Saint Marys, GA

#4 Jun 15, 2013
Years ago, Colin Powell, building upon what has been termed the Weinberger Doctrine, outlined a series of questions to be considered prior to the use of military action by United States forces. These were:

1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?
2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?
3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
7. Is the action supported by the American people?
8. Do we have genuine broad international support?

According to Powell, each of these questions needs to be answered in the affirmative for military force to be deployed. Regarding Syria, I am not sure you can get past the first one. I see no evidence that a "vital national security interest" is being impacted or threatened by anything going on in Syria.

“It's comong.”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#5 Jun 15, 2013
Moreno Jay wrote:
Do you have the right country? Syria, maybe?
Thank you. I knew it began with an "S". Hope your yard sale went well.

“It's comong.”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#6 Jun 15, 2013
JNL wrote:
Years ago, Colin Powell, building upon what has been termed the Weinberger Doctrine, outlined a series of questions to be considered prior to the use of military action by United States forces. These were:
1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?
2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?
3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
7. Is the action supported by the American people?
8. Do we have genuine broad international support?
According to Powell, each of these questions needs to be answered in the affirmative for military force to be deployed. Regarding Syria, I am not sure you can get past the first one. I see no evidence that a "vital national security interest" is being impacted or threatened by anything going on in Syria.
For us, it's still a no win.

“Master o Public Administration”

Since: Oct 10

St. Marys, GA

#7 Jun 16, 2013
Senora de la Iglesia wrote:
<quoted text>Thank you. I knew it began with an "S". Hope your yard sale went well.
You're welcome. It did.

I was amazed at how my dog, C.J., took on the role of greeter. He sat right next to me just inside the gate and greeted every visitor, never once going past the gate. He was in hog heaven with all the attention.

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.

St. Marys Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Trump UN Speech 2 hr Smelly Nuts 12
Camden County, Georgia 3 hr anon 5
How government works 4 hr Real Deal 1
topix censor alert 5 hr HSE 8
Hey Jay! 7 hr Jorges top 3
While it's already down 12 hr Say What 13
News Much of St. Marys still in the dark Mon Roberta1 3

St. Marys Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

St. Marys Mortgages