"Imminent threat"

[jimnyc]

So how many people, on this board, and my old board, stated that we should NEVER be involved in a war unless there is an imminent threat to our country involved? I can recall about 20 of these people by memory, but would have to search for an exact picture. Then how many politicians said the same or extremely similar? How many of the protesting anti-war nuts said the same? Code Pink? Endless amount of Democrat party supporters? I could go on and on...

My question is - where are they now?

[jimnyc]

A trip down memory lane. Anyone can do a search on these members with "imminent threat". I'm too lazy to quote and give links. Funny stuff! I wonder where they are all bitching and parading at with their protests?

Jillian
LiberalNation
Loosecannon
Guernicaa
Psychoblues
lily
John Doe
bullypulpit
JoeSteel
Moderate Democrat aka Maineman aka Manfrommaine aka Virgil

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So how many people, on this board, and my old board, stated that we should NEVER be involved in a war unless there is an imminent threat to our country involved? I can recall about 20 of these people by memory, but would have to search for an exact picture. Then how many politicians said the same or extremely similar? How many of the protesting anti-war nuts said the same? Code Pink? Endless amount of Democrat party supporters? I could go on and on...

My question is - where are they now?

Where indeed??? Seems all Obama had to do was cloak his desire in a false charge then claim humanitarian action was called for. Just a mere coincidence that this sudden humanitarian action will aid the Terrorist groups that are now the leadership of the rebels fighting in Syria. A mere coincidence that yet again Obama is supporting known and designated enemies of this nation! And by doing so is breaking a Federal law that forbids doing exactly that! I hope Congress tells the bastard hell no and he does it anyways. If that happens we sure enough will have a Constitutional crisis IMHO!!!!! The bastard is just arrogant enough to go ahead even if Congress clearly says no! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- However , I've wondered this about Syrian strike proposal coming to this. What if it's by design? What if he has steered it to a Congressional vote knowing Congress will say no. Then he ever so graciously abides by that NO- vote! AND WHY YOU MAY ASK WOULD HE DO THAT? FIRST--- So that then he has his almost invincible premade --EXCUSE- not to aid Israel in striking Iran to stop it's nuke program by pointing to that vote!! Of course he is too damn stupid to have ever thought up such a devious long range plan but undoubtedly his masters are not IMHO.. SECONDLY, to reestablish his not overriding Congressional authority which could be a big campaign issue in the coming 2014 election. Thereby negating one of the weapons that can be used against him and the Dem party in that election . For a major call in the 2014 election will be to retake the Senate and control both houses in Congress because Obama's abuse of power is greatly due to a divided Congress and the Senate backing Obama against the House of Representatives.. -Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

A trip down memory lane. Anyone can do a search on these members with "imminent threat". I'm too lazy to quote and give links. Funny stuff! I wonder where they are all bitching and parading at with their protests?

Jillian
LiberalNation
Loosecannon
Guernicaa
Psychoblues
lily
John Doe
bullypulpit
JoeSteel
Moderate Democrat aka Maineman aka Manfrommaine aka Virgil

How about any current members here? Are there still some here that were in that camp back then? I am sure a few inquiring minds here would like to know.-Tyr

[jimnyc]

How about any current members here? Are there still some here that were in that camp back then? I am sure a few inquiring minds here would like to know.-Tyr

The only current one I can think of, and I'm literally just guessing, would be Revelarts. But in his defense, while he may stated as much in the past, I'm confident his stance applies to both parties.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The only current one I can think of, and I'm literally just guessing, would be Revelarts. But in his defense, while he may stated as much in the past, I'm confident his stance applies to both parties.

ahh, crap... say it aint so!!! I like the Rev.... tell me he is a changed man... please... --Tyr

[hjmick]

I'll state right here for the record...


We should not involve ourselves in the clusterfuck that is Syria.


I did not support the decision to go into Iraq.


Afghanistan I was cool with.


Now, if that qualifies me for the camp as described above, so be it.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

When are these dumbasses going to stop citing that it was used as evidence that Assad did it? Proving a bank was robbed is not proving who did it but that's how they and the media present it to the public. Check this out. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireS...syria-20129539 Citing Sarin Use, US Seeks to Bolster Syria Case

WASHINGTON September 1, 2013 (AP)
By BRADLEY KLAPPER Associated Press <!-- -->
<iframe name="fb_xdm_frame_http" title="Facebook Cross Domain Communication Frame" id="fb_xdm_frame_http" aria-hidden="true" src="http://static.ak.facebook.com/connect/xd_arbiter.php?version=26#channel=f1e3353ab4b5c3e& channel_path=%2Fassets%2Fstatic%2Fperm_cache%2Fcha nnel.html%3Ffb_xd_fragment%23xd_sig%3Df2adfb70ca89 2e8%26&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fabcnews.go.com" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="border: currentColor;" allowtransparency="true" tab-index="-1"></iframe><iframe name="fb_xdm_frame_https" title="Facebook Cross Domain Communication Frame" id="fb_xdm_frame_https" aria-hidden="true" src="https://s-static.ak.facebook.com/connect/xd_arbiter.php?version=26#channel=f1e3353ab4b5c3e& channel_path=%2Fassets%2Fstatic%2Fperm_cache%2Fcha nnel.html%3Ffb_xd_fragment%23xd_sig%3Df2adfb70ca89 2e8%26&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fabcnews.go.com" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="border: currentColor;" allowtransparency="true" tab-index="-1"></iframe>




<div class="ad-728x90" id="banner-0" "=""><div class="adslug"><!--AD--></div><iframe width="728" height="90" id="_fw_frame_leaderboard" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true"></iframe> </div>

Citing Sarin Use, US Seeks to Bolster Syria Case

WASHINGTON September 1, 2013 (AP)
By BRADLEY KLAPPER Associated Press


<!-- empty -->

<fb:like class="fb_edge_widget_with_comment fb_iframe_widget" width="90" show_faces="false" layout="button_count" font="arial" href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/kerry-us-evidence-sarin-gas-syria-20129539" fb-xfbml-state="rendered" send="false"></fb:like>





<!-- empty //-->

<!-- empty //-->

<!-- empty -->

<!-- spacer -->

The Obama administration on Sunday confidently predicted congressional backing for limited military action in Syria and asserted that the Assad government used sarin gas in the deadly chemical attack that threatens to draw the U.S. into another Mideast conflict.
Senior U.S. officials sought to lay out their case to divided lawmakers in a classified briefing as the countdown began to the biggest foreign policy vote since Congress authorized President George W. Bush to invade Iraq.
In a series of interviews on the Sunday news shows, Secretary of State John Kerry said the case for intervention in Syria's 2½-year civil war was strengthening each day and that he expected American lawmakers to recognize the need for action when the "credibility of the United States is on the line."
He said President Barack Obama has the authority to launch retaliatory strikes with or without Congress' approval, but Kerry stopped short of saying the president would do so if the House or Senate withholds support.
"The stakes are just really too high here," Kerry said. "We are not going to lose this vote."
Seeking to sharpen the argument for war, Kerry said the United States has received hair and blood samples from first responders indicating that Syria's government forces used sarin in its Aug. 21 attack in the Damascus suburbs.
It was the first piece of specific physiological evidence cited by the administration, which previously cited only an unnamed nerve agent in the killing of 1,429 civilians, including more than 400 children. The U.S. says such chemical weapons use compels an international response. (1. Note-- Which would only prove it was actually used, nothing more!!--Tyr)
Washington has struggled to rally allies to its cause, however, with only France firmly on board among major military powers. Stalwart ally Britain cannot be counted on after Parliament rejected using force in a vote last week. That could be a harbinger of the difficult task ahead for the Obama administration as it seeks Congress' approval for cruise missile strikes and other limited measures once lawmakers return from summer break, which is scheduled to end Sept. 9. (2. They have been beating this drum long enough , give substantial and irrefutable proof that Assad did it or stop the GD lying bastards--Tyr) ----------------------------------------------------------- Yes, they think most Americans are this damn stupid and why not(?) they voted in Obama again didn't they?

[aboutime]

Anyone ever notice how NO politician, from either Lying party, ever asks the people in the military? Namely the relatives, and friends; how they feel about involving their loved-ones in uniform in actions NOT DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO, or THREATENING TO THE U.S.A.???

[fj1200]

So how many people, on this board, and my old board, stated that we should NEVER be involved in a war unless there is an imminent threat to our country involved?

That's quite a bright line standard but not one I necessarily attribute to the liberals you mentioned; more libertarian. I think "national interest" is more of a cross-the-aisle standard though the sides may disagree on what is in our national interest. I don't think Syria much fits the bill in either case.

[fj1200]

Anyone ever notice how NO politician, from either Lying party, ever asks the people in the military? Namely the relatives, and friends; how they feel about involving their loved-ones in uniform in actions NOT DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO, or THREATENING TO THE U.S.A.???

They already answered; "I, (state your name) do..."

[aboutime]

They already answered; "I, (state your name) do..."

B.S. ... Friends, and relatives of our Military DO NOT TAKE AN OATH. But large numbers of them actually VOTE.

[fj1200]

B.S. ... Friends, and relatives of our Military DO NOT TAKE AN OATH.

True, but they do however vote for their representatives.

[aboutime]

True, but they do however vote for their representatives.

What has that got to do with the TOPIC of this thread? Which you think you have managed to distort, and change.

You really are Obama....aren't ya?

[fj1200]

What has that got to do with the TOPIC of this thread? Which you think you have managed to distort, and change.

You really are Obama....aren't ya?

You already changed the topic in post #9. Do you think relatives of military personnel deserve a higher level of say than ordinary citizens?