Vote 'questions UK's role in world'

Vote 'questions UK's role in world'

There are 31 comments on the Salisbury Journal story from Aug 30, 2013, titled Vote 'questions UK's role in world'. In it, Salisbury Journal reports that:

David Cameron's defeat over UK involvement in military action against Syria will lead to "national soul-searching" about the country's role in the world, Chancellor George Osborne has admitted.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Salisbury Journal.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Stay home

United States

#1 Aug 30, 2013
It means
The will of the people,
Say NO to following obamma to hell!

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#2 Aug 30, 2013
The Brits don't want to get lumped in with Obama, the big-mouthed insane Loser.
.
We need Bush and Cheney back again.

“i hope we can change this!”

Since: Aug 08

usa

#3 Aug 30, 2013
if the "world" questions what Britain did, I would definitely question the world!

“Open your eyes”

Since: Sep 09

Central Florida

#4 Aug 30, 2013
Eighthman wrote:
The Brits don't want to get lumped in with Obama, the big-mouthed insane Loser.
.
We need Bush and Cheney back again.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Obama's policies are nothing more than an expansion and extension of Bush's policies.

If you want Bush back, then you should be thrilled with Obama's policies. For they are the same.

Think for yourself. Stop playing the D versus R game. Its a failed argument.

“Open your eyes”

Since: Sep 09

Central Florida

#5 Aug 30, 2013
British Parilament basically shut down Cameron. Which is a good thing.

Now only if Obama would follow the constitution and his own words from 2007, we could shut down this ambitious fool's desire to start WW3.

Obama in 2007 stated, "The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."

Joe Biden in 2007, "The president has no constitutional authority ... to take this nation to war ... unless we're attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked. And if he does, if he does, I would move to impeach him."
It has been said

United States

#6 Aug 30, 2013
Kahoki wrote:
<quoted text>
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Obama's policies are nothing more than an expansion and extension of Bush's policies.
If you want Bush back, then you should be thrilled with Obama's policies. For they are the same.
Think for yourself. Stop playing the D versus R game. Its a failed argument.
I know George Bush
He's a friend of mine
Barack obamma is no George Bush

obamma is as phony as it can be,
And not one world power nation will follow him on his crusade to hell
rizaldi benezine

Greeley, CO

#8 Aug 30, 2013
Gosh, the EuroTrash thought that by giving Barrack Obozo the Nobel Peace Prize for his work in the middle east that things would be all rosy by now. What happened?

Gee, could it be that electing an amateur just because he's black really doesn't do a damn thing to solve the nation's problems, much less the world's?

The Brits are an important (but lesser) partner in the free world's alliance. They see that we are led by a timid nobody who actually thinks that "leading from behind" makes a lick of sense. Naturally, they don't want to follow Obama anywhere because the truth is they can't. Why not? BECAUSE HE'S NOT LEADING!

This is a bad sign. However, the problem is in Washington DC, not London, and that problem's name is Obama.

Since: Feb 08

Hypoluxo Fl

#9 Aug 30, 2013
Kahoki wrote:
<quoted text>
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Obama's policies are nothing more than an expansion and extension of Bush's policies.
If you want Bush back, then you should be thrilled with Obama's policies. For they are the same.
Think for yourself. Stop playing the D versus R game. Its a failed argument.
You are absolutely correct. Now tell us all why the Repubs hate the guy. They loved Bush. But he's white.
rizaldi benezine

Greeley, CO

#10 Aug 30, 2013
Mykro wrote:
<quoted text>You are absolutely correct. Now tell us all why the Repubs hate the guy. They loved Bush. But he's white.
Thank you for admitting that when the Dems are desperate, they turn to their old standby: "Obama is a failure due to all the racist!"

Yes, all those brown people in the middle east are killing each other because the white racist here at home are preventing our Black Massiah & One True Lord from delivering his heaven-sent vision of earthly peace.

Please just ignore Lord Obama's "leading from behind" stuff. That has nothing to do with anything. It was a special message to liberals only and not intended for use by the general public.
The racist cancer

United States

#11 Aug 30, 2013
rizaldi benezine wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for admitting that when the Dems are desperate, they turn to their old standby: "Obama is a failure due to all the racist!"
Yes, all those brown people in the middle east are killing each other because the white racist here at home are preventing our Black Massiah & One True Lord from delivering his heaven-sent vision of earthly peace.
Please just ignore Lord Obama's "leading from behind" stuff. That has nothing to do with anything. It was a special message to liberals only and not intended for use by the general public.
Obamma jumped into the Zimmerman case,

And with it he's divided this nation

EXACTLY as he intended.

Obammma is NOT a friend of AMERICA

President Reagan always began his speech
MY FELLOW AMERICANS....

THOSE words would create a notional VOMIT MOVEMENT coming from obamma!
carey529

United States

#12 Aug 30, 2013
Mykro wrote:
<quoted text>You are absolutely correct. Now tell us all why the Repubs hate the guy. They loved Bush. But he's white.
if he IS correct, why did you liberal loons all hate Bush so much, and adore Obama for doing the same things?
couldn't POSSIBLY be because he's black...could it?

the stupidity of the left is exceeded only by the hypocrisy of the left...

“It's Time to Defeat Terrorism ”

Since: May 11

NYC

#13 Aug 30, 2013
UK role in the world? Obama is the ruler of the world as the dictator of the world who make the decisions for the world and spying the world with his NSA henchmen. The world does not trust the Obama's NSA spying info as Obama use it to spy against innocent Americans and innocent people all over the world. Did the Syrian regime sent e-mails that were captured by the NSA? Probably not. Obama will go alone in the world without US Congress and without the American people for his own reckless and childish personal and anti-American world agenda using four old navy destroyers launching stupid missies in the wilderness deserts of Syria and then will run away from any retaliation. Bush's war in Iraq and Afghanistan brought disaster to American people and zero achievement dealing with the Mozlem Brother terrorists. Now the Mozlem Brother sympathizer Obama who studied the culture of the Jihadists in Indonesia Madrassa in his youth is going to attack Syria and run away while leaving Israel alone to deal with the Iranian nukes, Syrian WMDs and Russian missiles. Where is US Congress approval for the reckless attack in Syria, Mr. Bush?
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#14 Aug 30, 2013
Here's hoping that America follows in this "soul-searching" and forces Obama and every other interventionist would-be "leader" of both parties to realize we're not running the damn world.

Take OFF the cowboy hat, America. You can't shoot your way out of your problems. Too many dead civilians laying around afterward.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#15 Aug 30, 2013
Take note, Mr. Obama:

No Congressional support

No U.N. support

NO ATTACK

Period.
buckwheat

Tulsa, OK

#16 Aug 30, 2013
You're all a bunch of dumb fcuks. It's not about Obama vs. Bush, so stop playing the "my daddy can whip your dadday" game. It's about the murder of 1,429 Syrian civilians with poisonous nerve gas. 426 were children. I think that trumps the Dem vs Rep argument for the moment.

Typical fcuknig Brits. Won't do sh!t to help with this murderous violation of civilians, but will be the first to grab onto the U.S. when they are in jeopardy.

People cheered when Bush Jr. blasted Iraq for no reason other than Sadaam threatening Bush Sr. This time we have a legitimate reason for squashing a tyrrant.

I don't care for Obama, either, but he's all we have, so let's make it about the murders and put a stop to Assad.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#17 Aug 30, 2013
buckwheat wrote:
You're all a bunch of dumb fcuks. It's not about Obama vs. Bush, so stop playing the "my daddy can whip your dadday" game. It's about the murder of 1,429 Syrian civilians with poisonous nerve gas. 426 were children. I think that trumps the Dem vs Rep argument for the moment.
Typical fcuknig Brits. Won't do sh!t to help with this murderous violation of civilians, but will be the first to grab onto the U.S. when they are in jeopardy.
People cheered when Bush Jr. blasted Iraq for no reason other than Sadaam threatening Bush Sr. This time we have a legitimate reason for squashing a tyrrant.
I don't care for Obama, either, but he's all we have, so let's make it about the murders and put a stop to Assad.
1. It's not our problem

2. No U.N. sanctions or agreement to intervene

3. No proof of who used the weapons

4. Too many interventions already in the Middle East

5. Further econmic hardship and risk to our military

Just for five good reasons not to intervene, off the top of my head.

Oh, and

6. Risk of major international conflict with Iran, Russia, and China

That's a good one too.
rizaldi benezine

Greeley, CO

#18 Aug 30, 2013
buckwheat wrote:
You're all a bunch of dumb fcuks. It's not about Obama vs. Bush, so stop playing the "my daddy can whip your dadday" game. It's about the murder of 1,429 Syrian civilians with poisonous nerve gas. 426 were children. I think that trumps the Dem vs Rep argument for the moment.
Typical fcuknig Brits. Won't do sh!t to help with this murderous violation of civilians, but will be the first to grab onto the U.S. when they are in jeopardy.
People cheered when Bush Jr. blasted Iraq for no reason other than Sadaam threatening Bush Sr. This time we have a legitimate reason for squashing a tyrrant.
I don't care for Obama, either, but he's all we have, so let's make it about the murders and put a stop to Assad.
I understand your concern. But that's not what's going to happen. We're going to launch another "shock & awe" fireworks display, claim victory and then walk away. Nothing will change in Syria, including Assad's grip on power. He will most likely be encouraged by this. So will Iran and North Korea.

If we do get lucky and knock out Assad personally, starting "regime change", it'll be just like Obama's little war in Libya, but with a deadly twist. In Libya we killed Khadafi but then left his huge weapons stores strewn all across the desert. They were scooped up by Al Qaeda and now northern Africa is crawling with well-armed jihadist. This time we will leave huge caches of chemical weapons for Al Qaeda to delight in.

The sad thing is that the entire show is being done for just that: to put on a show. NOBODY will take it seriously.

The liberal hypocrisy of crying about a civilian-gassing mass murderer & dictator needing to be punished is laughable in the extreme.
buckwheat

Tulsa, OK

#19 Aug 30, 2013
[snip]
rizaldi benezine wrote:
<quoted text>
a civilian-gassing mass murderer & dictator needing to be punished is laughable in the extreme.
I can't seem to find the hilarity in this. Apparently you're a bush supporter, so I guess you were on the other side of the fence with Iraq? We straight up destroyed a country to kill a man for threatening, and running his head about bush jr's father. How patriotic of us, right?

Oh wait, there's oil in Syria. Does that sweeten the pot?
buckwheat

Tulsa, OK

#20 Aug 30, 2013
chisholm wrote:
<quoted text>
1. It's not our problem
2. No U.N. sanctions or agreement to intervene
3. No proof of who used the weapons
4. Too many interventions already in the Middle East
5. Further econmic hardship and risk to our military
Just for five good reasons not to intervene, off the top of my head.
Oh, and
6. Risk of major international conflict with Iran, Russia, and China
That's a good one too.
. It's not our problem - Neither was Iraq at the time we bombed it.
2. No U.N. sanctions or agreement to intervene - Part of the processs.
3. No proof of who used the weapons - Intelligence says Assad.
More proof than bush jr. had against Iraq. He had proof there weren't any wmd's and still jumped.
4. Too many interventions already in the Middle East - So the rest get a free pass?
5. Further econmic hardship and risk to our military - Wait for precision strike on Assad.
Just for five good reasons not to intervene, off the top of my head.
Oh, and
6. Risk of major international conflict with Iran, Russia, and China - So we only stand up to those who can't fight back, and cower to those who are equal to us in strength?
That's a good one too - I get it, "If you weren't so big, I'd stand up to you."

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#22 Aug 30, 2013
Brit's are still steamed about GW lying to them about how Iraq would go.....still licking theoir wounds over the cost in lives and assets and that Iraq dragged on, seemingly forever....

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

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.

Conservatives Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Mundell: Do not demand that DUP changes stance ... Sep '17 Jesus Latter Day ... 1
News Is Defending the Second Amendment akin to Suppo... (Sep '13) Aug '17 C Kersey 3
News May slams Trump for failing to condemn far-righ... Aug '17 Retribution 42
News Tories have 'come a long way' on gay rights, Th... Jul '17 Marcavage s Trick 1
News Prime Minister reaffirms stance disagreeing wit... Jul '17 Fundiementally ill 3
News Convicted rapist arrested in Pensacola Jun '17 guest 2
News Scottish Tory leader 'given gay rights pledge f... Jun '17 Anton Currywurst 4
More from around the web