Syria's WMD's could someday be used here on us.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

no link? shocking
the only thing Mr Drum has taught me is how naive he is. I hope you feed the poor guy once in awhile.

Drummonds, naive!!?? You have to be joking! His comments can be called many things but calling him naive is just silly. The man posts detailed comments in a brilliant manner. I dare say I'd put him up against anybody here in a debate as long as he is defending that which he believes on! If he is ever in my neck of the woods I'd feed him alright. I'd take him to the Rendevous restaurant in Memphis and get him the best plate of Southern dry BBQ in the South! I am great friends with Bobby the head BBQ master there. -Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?id=278898

Spy satellites, advanced reconnaissance aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles are just some of the systems that Israel is using to track events in Syria and specifically to keep an eye on the country’s chemical weapons arsenal.

In recent weeks, Israeli politicians and military officers have repeated the mantra that Israel is carefully tracking Syria’s chemical weapons and has warned that if it sees a Hezbollah attempt to get its hands on the weapons, it will use force to stop it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
United States should be all over this too. Israel(little satan) may be target number one but America(big Satan) is target number two.
The threat of those weapons getting into terrorists organisations hands is very real . Too late after one is used on a major U.S. city for the -could have, should have- game to be played! For it would not bring back all the dead ..-Tyr

[Dilloduck]

http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?id=278898

Spy satellites, advanced reconnaissance aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles are just some of the systems that Israel is using to track events in Syria and specifically to keep an eye on the country’s chemical weapons arsenal.

In recent weeks, Israeli politicians and military officers have repeated the mantra that Israel is carefully tracking Syria’s chemical weapons and has warned that if it sees a Hezbollah attempt to get its hands on the weapons, it will use force to stop it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
United States should be all over this too. Israel(little satan) may be target number one but America(big Satan) is target number two.
The threat of those weapons getting into terrorists organisations hands is very real . Too late after one is used on a major U.S. city for the -could have, should have- game to be played! For it would not bring back all the dead ..-Tyr

Glad to hear everyone's on the job.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Glad to hear everyone's on the job.

Your previous posts on the subject lead me to doubt how sincere that comment was. Surely after all that Big D has put forth for your consideration you have revised your previous stance of USA staying away from overseeing the disposition of those wmd.-Tyr

[Dilloduck]

Your previous posts on the subject lead me to doubt how sincere that comment was. Surely after all that Big D has put forth for your consideration you have revised your previous stance of USA staying away from overseeing the disposition of those wmd.-Tyr

Ya but you can't interpret my posts worth a damn. There are many countries including the US keeping an eye on these wmds. No need for one country to "oversee" the job and no need for US military intervention. Big D---

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Ya but you can't interpret my posts worth a damn.

Perhaps if you were more clear and had given specific reasons why you think the hands off approach best my intepretations would not be so "cloudy" about your true stand on it all. To me it often appears when not leaning a bit left you are trying to straddle the fence . Do I leave anybody reason to doubt where I stand on any subject that I discuss? -Tyr

[Dilloduck]

Perhaps if you were more clear and had given specific reasons why you think the hands off approach best my intepretations would not be so "cloudy" about your true stand on it all. To me it often appears when not leaning a bit left you are trying to straddle the fence . Do I leave anybody reason to doubt where I stand on any subject that I discuss? -Tyr

I'm very clear. You just refuse to accept my moderate approach and have to label me as an appeaser, liberal, lefty, etc. and feel a need to claim I have said things that have not been said.

[Drummond]

You have actually done both. Poor memory or what?-
And Drummonds has given you quite an education(free of charge) but you refuse to learn. A pity too. -Tyr

... Catching up with these posts on this thread.

And you're right, of course. Dilloduck's memory is becoming rather 'selective' again ...

[Drummond]

Drummonds, naive!!?? You have to be joking! His comments can be called many things but calling him naive is just silly. The man posts detailed comments in a brilliant manner. I dare say I'd put him up against anybody here in a debate as long as he is defending that which he believes on! If he is ever in my neck of the woods I'd feed him alright. I'd take him to the Rendevous restaurant in Memphis and get him the best plate of Southern dry BBQ in the South! I am great friends with Bobby the head BBQ master there. -Tyr

Maybe the day will dawn when I take you up on your kind offer, Tyr ? I'd be proud to do so. I've never visited Memphis (New York and Connecticut several times, but never anywhere away from the Eastern Seaboard ..).

If you ever visit my neck of the woods, I'd be happy to show you the cuisine at 'Revolutions'. [Or, a train ride away to London, there's always tea at the Ritz ? Or a tour of several pubs I know ?]

[Drummond]

I'm very clear. You just refuse to accept my moderate approach and have to label me as an appeaser, liberal, lefty, etc. and feel a need to claim I have said things that have not been said.

To be fair, Dilloduck, you HAVE adopted stances that would help those we regard as our enemies ... which is only typical of the Left. You want activity by America's military forces to be downscaled, and you've even offered posts suggesting that other countries, such as my own, take on the role which your own would be better suited to see through to the end.

I say again .. if your people did exactly as you advocated, terrorists would undoubtedly have an easier time of it.

If .. I say IF .. you're being falsely accused of Leftieism, then it has to follow that an apology is due to you. But, Dilloduck, it would first help if you somehow stopped arguing like one !!

Until you do, I for one will regard you as one myself. As, indeed, I have for quite some time.

Here's a thought, by the way. Assange is Leftie-backed, so is undoubtedly following a Leftie agenda himself. Knowing this, why do you maintain the Assange signature-piece as part of your posts ?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Maybe the day will dawn when I take you up on your kind offer, Tyr ? I'd be proud to do so. I've never visited Memphis (New York and Connecticut several times, but never anywhere away from the Eastern Seaboard ..).

If you ever visit my neck of the woods, I'd be happy to show you the cuisine at 'Revolutions'. [Or, a train ride away to London, there's always tea at the Ritz ? Or a tour of several pubs I know ?]

It's a deal my friend, if ever I get over there you'll be notified of my trip before I board the plane heading across the big pond. Likewise you let me know if heading around my parts. I'll ice down a case of San Miguels and make reservations at the Rendezvous in Memphis .---Tyr

http://www.hogsfly.com/ When they're done, we pack them carefully in tough, industry-leading packaging. Then our hogs really fly: we ship your ribs to you overnight using Memphis' own FedEx. When they get to your front door a few hours later, they're good and fresh, ready to heat up on your grill and serve to your grateful friends and family. Want to know more? Here's how we ship our ribs and here's how to serve them.

'MR. DOWNTOWN' CHARLIE VERGOS WILL BE MISSED On Saturday March 27th, 2010, we sadly lost Mr. Charlie Vergos at 84. The owner of Rendezvous will be remembered for his love of downtown, committment to community, and creation of the world-famous Rendezvous ribs

Charlie Vergos took an old coal chute from the wall of his smoky basement tavern in downtown Memphis and created barbecue history. Since he first opened the doors in 1948, Charlie Vergos' Rendezvous has attracted a long list of high-profile guests including Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, former Vice President Al Gore, and entertainers such as Bill Cosby, Justin Timberlake and Mick Jagger.

While he was most famous for his ribs, Charlie was also known for his civic contributions to the city of Memphis. He was always grateful to the citizens of Memphis who supported his business. Additionally, Charlie was a major force in the revitalization of downtown Memphis. Memphis mayor A.C. Wharton called him "an icon for saving downtown."

Charlie has left the restaurant in the faithful hands of his three children so that the Memphis tradition can continue for generations to come.

[Dilloduck]

... Catching up with these posts on this thread.

And you're right, of course. Dilloduck's memory is becoming rather 'selective' again ...

proove it with a link or it didn't happen

[Drummond]

proove it with a link or it didn't happen

The trouble with answering a post like this is that I cannot precisely know what your memory has selected you to remember - or not - at any one moment in time. Though .. I think that, maybe, some of it is context-driven ?

OK, well, if it's an example of my 'educating' you .. I'm sure a review of this thread would suffice, if you take the time to try it. Check out, though, for example ... this link (you said you wanted one ..) ..

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthre...405#post567405

.. to be found early on in this thread. You asked .. 'What are you suggesting that the US do in order to defend itself from WMD's that may be/are in Syria ?' My answer was:-

I take it from your question that you accept the nature of the danger this situation poses ? All well and good, if so.

Well, it's difficult, I'll give you that.

One problem is that Russia and China both want to continue to defend Assad's interests. Which from a world security angle, MIGHT be reasonable, if Assad had the means of asserting power decisively. However, it's becoming clear that he doesn't.

So establishing stability is the key.

Both Russia and China need to be told (maybe via the UN ?) that all they're doing is helping to prop up an unstable situation, and that this must stop. They would be wise to cooperate in an initiative which lands forces in the area to lend stability to warzone areas (with American forces a part of that; you can't just have them march in on their own !!). Better that they cooperate than not, though if they don't, they need to butt out while others do the job instead.

The UN might have a role as a communications medium, but can they be trusted with any more than that ? I really think not.

So, unless you also go in for carpet-bombing .. NOT my first choice ! .. I'd say you need to land troops there and either take the place over, or, do what the Soviets did in Afghanistan and prop up a native Government. Perhaps purely as a temporary measure, though ... I'm sure you'd prefer to institute proper democracy there.

Whatever the precise logistics of what would need to be done, one overriding imperative has to surely be applied .. which is to absolutely avoid just standing on the sidelines, and letting any manner of militant crazies step in, instead. You need CONTROL of the situation, and if YOU don't have it, then anyone else, no matter how savage or hostile, may grab it instead.

... and what would THAT mean for your security ??

If I say so myself, I thought I was being quite helpful (.. and, may I remind you, no fee was charged ..).

Several posts later, you supplied your response ... and it was a response that I think most cop-out Leftie types could have called their own, and fairly proudly so. You posted ..

Let's see----get the UN to tell Russia and China to fix it and if that doesn't work send in American troops ?

Do you have a plan B like sending in the Brits who started the whole mideast mess in the first place ?

So, your basic preference was for powers other than your own to shoulder the responsibility for your own security on the issue being discussed !

[Dilloduck]

The trouble with answering a post like this is that I cannot precisely know what your memory has selected you to remember - or not - at any one moment in time. Though .. I think that, maybe, some of it is context-driven ?

OK, well, if it's an example of my 'educating' you .. I'm sure a review of this thread would suffice, if you take the time to try it. Check out, though, for example ... this link (you said you wanted one ..) ..

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthre...405#post567405

.. to be found early on in this thread. You asked .. 'What are you suggesting that the US do in order to defend itself from WMD's that may be/are in Syria ?' My answer was:-



If I say so myself, I thought I was being quite helpful (.. and, may I remind you, no fee was charged ..).

Several posts later, you supplied your response ... and it was a response that I think most cop-out Leftie types could have called their own, and fairly proudly so. You posted ..



So, your basic preference was for powers other than your own to shoulder the responsibility for your own security on the issue being discussed !

America should shoulder it's own responsibilities--not the rest of the worlds. I have never remotely suggested that we surender to anyone and these have consistently been my points. Points which are far from liberal I might add

[Drummond]

America should shoulder it's own responsibilities--not the rest of the worlds. I have never remotely suggested that we surender to anyone and these have consistently been my points. Points which are far from liberal I might add

You really fail to see that issues involving America's security falls under the heading of 'it's own responsibilities' .. ??

Syrian WMD's getting into the hands of terrorists is very definitely a matter involving American security !!! Yet, you've offered arguments suggesting that American forces take a back seat when it comes to tackling that issue.

Do you not consider that inaction .. NEEDLESS inaction .. has great potential to surrender American lives up to the 'tender mercies' of terrorist trash ?

Perhaps you'd not consider it any sort of surrender, though. So, in that scenario, what would that be, by your reckoning ? A VICTORY ??