|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8 [Next] | ||||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
I am glad he won't attack.
Nutbthe constitution has been no bar to him doing what he wanted till now. Glad he read it.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
Couldn't resist the barb could you? He's not only read the Constitution but, unlike most of his detractors, understands it as well.
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
But it has never stopped him from doing what he wants. Or are you going to claim he followed it 100% perfectly?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
Let's just say he's followed it a lot more closely than many of his predecessors.
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
No you don't get to do that remember? What others did has no bearing on his actions sorry. Or is this one of those times it is allowed?
It is reflex isn't it?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
No. Just a statement of fact. Besides, which predecessors did you think I was referring to? I don't recall mentioning them by name. Truth be told, though, the first ones that came to mind were Nixon when he invaded Cambodia and Reagan in Iran Contra. Bush, in fact, did get congressional authorization before he went into Iraq.
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
I don't care if you meant JFK and the Bay of Pigs it does not make it any more right. You just can't help it.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
LOL! You seem to forget that YOU are the one who continues to refer to the President as "Mr. Hopey Changey" as a knee jerk reaction to nearly everything he does. (And I'm surprised to hear Palinism's like that coming from you.)
Just can't help it, can you? |
|||||||||
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts |
Quote:
On 2013-08-31 11:55, LobowolfXXX wrote: Ah I see, to you the Reagan years were in a land far away and long ago. Perhaps then the recent non-attack on Israel for its use of White Phosphorus is more timely for you?
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
|||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
No, no...certainly Obama should be held responsible and presumed to be in agreement with everything a different president did while he (Obama, that is) was in his 20s.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
Bob1Dog Inner circle Wife: It's me or this houseful of 1159 Posts |
Quote:
On 2013-08-31 13:04, mastermindreader wrote: I guess you forgot about the Kurds, huh?
What if the Hokey Pokey really IS what it's all about?
My neighbor rang my doorbell at 2:30 a.m. this morning, can you believe that, 2:30 a.m.!? Lucky for him I was still up playing my drums. |
|||||||||
tomsk192 Inner circle 3894 Posts |
Quote:
On 2013-08-31 21:30, Bob1Dog wrote: YES! |
|||||||||
acesover Special user I believe I have 821 Posts |
Regardless of whether Obama has the power to attack Syria or not. I have to ask. Is it to our advantage to support the military or the rebels?
Or are we just being a good guy and saying don't use chemical warfare? I truthfully do not know enough about their politics. Does it really matter what group is in power in Syria? Let me clarify that. Does it matter to The United States as to what group is in power in Syria? Any explanation would be appreciated.
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
|
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
I think what matters is that the Syrian government is ignoring every international agreement since World War I and committing genocide against innocent civilians with the use of chemical weapons. The question is whether it is morally right to just stand back and watch.
|
|||||||||
Bob1Dog Inner circle Wife: It's me or this houseful of 1159 Posts |
Quote:
On 2013-09-01 00:22, mastermindreader wrote: I ask again, what about the Kurds?
What if the Hokey Pokey really IS what it's all about?
My neighbor rang my doorbell at 2:30 a.m. this morning, can you believe that, 2:30 a.m.!? Lucky for him I was still up playing my drums. |
|||||||||
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts |
Quote:
On 2013-08-31 21:05, LobowolfXXX wrote: Nice multiple out there. Ignore my comment about Israel's chemical weapons, and insist on repeating the argument that I already was willing to concede for argument's sake. To state that the President acts out of moral reasoning is always going to be a losing argument. There are just such a plethora of counter examples. Much saner to understand US government actions as based on other interests which always trump morality when push comes to shove.
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
|||||||||
acesover Special user I believe I have 821 Posts |
Quote:
On 2013-09-01 00:22, mastermindreader wrote: I understand where you are coming from and you go on to say and I quote. "The question is whether it is morally right to just stand back and watch." BUT...That is your question not mine. My question is who is it better to back as far as The United States is concerned? Just think it through. Will we be in a bind again if we help the rebels? A different situation than chemical warfare but still a situation that has to be solved with intervention? I guess what I am asking is who are the bad guys politically and how can they help or hurt the United States? Or do we have to help the military this month and the rebels next month and on and on? Is Syria just a money pit for our money? Remember, politics makes strange bedfellows. And make no doubt about it, we are getting involved in their politics.
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
|
|||||||||
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts |
Who do you mean by the US aces? The rich who always benefit from war or the poor saps who will be used as cannon fodder? The working people who will be told that their schools and libraries need to be closed because there's no money, or the arms manufacturers?
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
|||||||||
Bob1Dog Inner circle Wife: It's me or this houseful of 1159 Posts |
On 2013-08-31 13:04, mastermindreader wrote:
There is no question, unlike in Iraq, that Syria has used chemical weapons on its own citizens. [/quote] I guess you forgot about the Kurds, huh? [/quote] Wow. So no one wishes to address the Kurds fate at the hands of Saddam vis-a-vis the broad brushed statement above? Most of y'all would be on me like hound dogs on a treed coon if I made a statement as phony as that. So much for fairness. Y'all win. Have a nice weekend.
What if the Hokey Pokey really IS what it's all about?
My neighbor rang my doorbell at 2:30 a.m. this morning, can you believe that, 2:30 a.m.!? Lucky for him I was still up playing my drums. |
|||||||||
balducci Loyal user Canada 227 Posts |
Quote:
On 2013-09-01 00:22, mastermindreader wrote: From Wikipedia: "Almost all countries in the world have joined the Chemical Weapons Convention. Currently 189 of the 196 states recognized by the United Nations are party to the CWC. Of the seven states that are not, two have signed but not yet ratified the treaty (Burma and Israel) and five states have not signed the treaty (Angola, North Korea, Egypt, South Sudan and SYRIA [emphasis mine])." Now, you might say that MOST nations have signed onto the convention so Syria should be held to account or something. Be careful with that way of thinking. To wit: "The original international citizens initiative launched in 1997 by the International Campaign to Ban Landmines gained 855,000 signatories worldwide. The Convention gained 122 country signatures when it opened for signing on 3 December 1997 in Ottawa, Canada. Currently, there are 161 States Parties to the Treaty. Thirty-five countries have not signed the treaty and one more has signed but did not ratify. The states that have not signed the treaty includes a majority of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council: China, the UNITED STATES [emphasis mine] and Russia. South Korea, like North Korea, has not signed the treaty, believing the use of landmines to be crucial to the defense of their territory against the other." They are still cleaning landmines and cluster bombs out of Iraq.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » O'Reilly -- Accusation and Apology (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |