Thread: Strike against Syria

Originally Posted by gugi

No, I didn't say that at all. I said that he is doing the politically savvy thing to do, and it also happens to be a nice change for the country.
As far as what are his motives, I don't think anybody here can tell that, but I suspect that as usual it's a mixture. I also think that motives are secondary if not tertiary in importance to the situation.
I think it's a rather serious matter, and stupid stuff like bastardization of his name seems to me at the very least distasteful in the context of killing thousands of people.

"I think he is seeking approval because it is politically correct and fast polling and the lack of British support told him he was making a bad political move on Sat,,, nothing more"

Again we agree...

Except I do not like Obummer

I like the way the administration is saying such an attack on Syria is not war we're just trying to do.....(you fill in the blanks).

When you extend that reasoning when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor it wasn't war they were just trying to reduce our capability to attack them. No boots on the ground for them either (har har). Of course in those days they made a declaration of war but countries were more honest about it back then.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Seems we pretty much agree other than one point...


You believe that Obummer is seeking approval because that is what the Constitution says (it doesn't) and it is a good thing to do according to the American people (it is) ...

I think he is seeking approval because it is politically correct and fast polling and the lack of British support told him he was making a bad political move on Sat,,, nothing more

Maybe he's seeking approval because going in without it being sanctioned by the UN is an illegal act and as least if he seeks approval from congress he'll feel just a BIT better about it? Then again, one more illegal war added to the quiver is neither here nor there I guess...

As I am being constantly told by my wife, whether you like them or not doesn't matter. They are the leader of your country and in a democracy you've got to lump it. Sooner or later your side gets its turn and the world again is a better place.

Whether Obama is doing the right thing or not, he's doing what he was democratically elected to do (lead) and what his is legally and politically allowed to get away with. No political leader does any more or less, unfortunately.

But I definitely know how you feel Glen - I am about to have to live through probably 6 years of a leader I despise, and it is not a good feeling.

James.

Originally Posted by gugi

No, I didn't say that at all. I said that he is doing the politically savvy thing to do, and it also happens to be a nice change for the country.
As far as what are his motives, I don't think anybody here can tell that, but I suspect that as usual it's a mixture. I also think that motives are secondary if not tertiary in importance to the situation.
I think it's a rather serious matter, and stupid stuff like bastardization of his name seems to me at the very least distasteful in the context of killing thousands of people.



I don't know if you just live in a fantasy world where everything is black and white, or your dislike for Obama is so great that nothing is ever going to be good for you, but it doesn't really matter, as you seem to only be interested in spin and opinion and not in logical arguments. By the standard you're setting there's never been and never will be a leader outside of the hollywood movies.

You know when you make an issue of something, like in this case Syria's situation, you can't just walk away as if nothing happened. Unlike many other places where atrocities are the norm, but are being ignored, Syria is strategically important so there was no way it could stay under the radar. And the long-term US policy has put US in a corner, which is now exploited by enemies like Iran, and various religious extremists, rivals like Russia, and China, 'friends' like Israel, and Turkey, and opportunists like the various suni dictatorships.

As far as I can tell Obama is trying to build a coalition both in US and abroad based on that 'chemical weapons are horrible' treaty. May be he will succeed, may be he won't, but if he doesn't then it's either a lack of evidence, or the world community would own up to its hypocrisy and that may end up bringing changes in international politics.

And yes, the gas supply is one of the bigger geopolitical concerns but far from not the only one.

Really gugi? I think I can follow logic just fine thank you. Apparently you are intent on ignoring my statements on national interest and would rather inject my personal distaste.

Originally Posted by Jimbo

,,,,,,,,,,,,But I definitely know how you feel Glen - I am about to have to live through probably 6 years of a leader I despise, and it is not a good feeling.

James.

Can we swap leaders with ya??

Originally Posted by Hirlau

Can we swap leaders with ya??

If it were up to me, in a heartbeat. Though I would feel a bit guilty because I do like you guys

James.

Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider

Maybe he's seeking approval because going in without it being sanctioned by the UN is an illegal act and as least if he seeks approval from congress he'll feel just a BIT better about it? Then again, one more illegal war added to the quiver is neither here nor there I guess...

Originally Posted by Jimbo

As I am being constantly told by my wife, whether you like them or not doesn't matter. They are the leader of your country and in a democracy you've got to lump it. Sooner or later your side gets its turn and the world again is a better place.

Whether Obama is doing the right thing or not, he's doing what he was democratically elected to do (lead) and what his is legally and politically allowed to get away with. No political leader does any more or less, unfortunately.

But I definitely know how you feel Glen - I am about to have to live through probably 6 years of a leader I despise, and it is not a good feeling.

James.

You guys need to actually listen to the speech from today...

Who said it, and what was said? And given a choice, I don't think you want Abbott over Obama either .


Mick


P.S I'm bowing out now (if my will power can hold up to it). I think I've stated my opinion anyway...

I'll keep an ear open today for the speech - I assume it is from Obama? I am sure that if it is important the Australian news will report it after it deals with the vastly more important issues of how tired our candidates look and which of their children are the most attractive.

James.