:P
''By 10-7, the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations moved the measure to a full Senate vote, expected next week.''
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23967190
This topic is locked from further discussion.
:P
''By 10-7, the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations moved the measure to a full Senate vote, expected next week.''
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23967190
Awesome, lets spend more time and money bombing brown people. HoolaHoopManwell, if assad would just put all his arms out in the open and move the brown people away from them, they wouldn't be getting bombed.
[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]Awesome, lets spend more time and money bombing brown people. comp_atkinswell, if assad would just put all his arms out in the open and move the brown people away from them, they wouldn't be getting bombed.
mhm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlMwc1c0HRQ
[QUOTE="VaguelyTagged"]Exactly. Bomb the nasty people on both sides or do nothing. The mission is to downgrade his ability to cause any more chem attacks.the US should just bomb both parties.
KC_Hokie
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="VaguelyTagged"]Exactly. Bomb the nasty people on both sides or do nothing. The mission is to downgrade his ability to cause any more chem attacks. Which is basically impossible. He's already moved his missiles underground or into civilian areas. Assad has had way too much time to prepare.the US should just bomb both parties.
killzowned24
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="VaguelyTagged"]Exactly. Bomb the nasty people on both sides or do nothing. The mission is to downgrade his ability to cause any more chem attacks. Ya, while creating more problems at the same time. Sounds like a great idea. I mean this mission doesn't sound like anything from the past or anything.the US should just bomb both parties.
killzowned24
I have a question.. Why is it when there's something ify in the world.. It's only the U.S and pulling their allies into it. Why does this country have to be the one to do this stuff? If the world feels we need to strike, why can't somebody else take care of it? Do we think we are some chosen god or something?
We won't even have the UK with us. Their parliament voted no. France's parliament could vote no as well.I have a question.. Why is it when there's something ify in the world.. It's only the U.S and pulling their allies into it. Why does this country have to be the one to do this stuff? if we attack, why can't somebody else take care of it? Do we think we are some chosen god or something?
The_Lipscomb
We're doing this alone. Not even a tiny 'coalition of the willing".
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="killzowned24"] The mission is to downgrade his ability to cause any more chem attacks.Person0Which is basically impossible. He's already moved his missiles underground or into civilian areas. Assad has had way too much time to prepare. Its mostly artillery rockets or bombs. Bombs need aircraft, rockets artillery needs a launcher. He hasn't hidden those There are no plans to bomb airbases. Scuds and other missiles have already been moved underground or into civilian areas.
That's what happens when you announce what you're going to do 2+ weeks before you do it.
We won't even have the UK with us. Their parliament voted no. France's parliament could vote no as well.[QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"]
I have a question.. Why is it when there's something ify in the world.. It's only the U.S and pulling their allies into it. Why does this country have to be the one to do this stuff? if we attack, why can't somebody else take care of it? Do we think we are some chosen god or something?
KC_Hokie
We're doing this alone. Not even a tiny 'coalition of the willing".
That should tell this country something then.. and good for the U.K for not joining.. more of out allies need to start backing out to send us a message.We won't even have the UK with us. Their parliament voted no. France's parliament could vote no as well.[QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"]
I have a question.. Why is it when there's something ify in the world.. It's only the U.S and pulling their allies into it. Why does this country have to be the one to do this stuff? if we attack, why can't somebody else take care of it? Do we think we are some chosen god or something?
KC_Hokie
We're doing this alone. Not even a tiny 'coalition of the willing".
Is the freedom fry going to make a return?Its mostly artillery rockets or bombs. Bombs need aircraft, rockets artillery needs a launcher. He hasn't hidden those There are no plans to bomb airbases. Scuds and other missiles have already been moved underground or into civilian areas.[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"] Which is basically impossible. He's already moved his missiles underground or into civilian areas. Assad has had way too much time to prepare.KC_Hokie
That's what happens when you announce what you're going to do 2+ weeks before you do it.
I doubt all of his weapons are moved underground because that would give the rebels a huge advantage without aircraft bombings and artillery hitting them constantly.Ha, how OT Americans went from anti-war to all-out genocide. Classic.Victorious_FizeI've been anti war since I was a kid during 9/11.. and I'm still anti-war now.. The last necessary war we were in most recent times is world war 2.. Once Vietnam hit.. this country has been starting horrible wars that don't really hold our interest.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]There are no plans to bomb airbases. Scuds and other missiles have already been moved underground or into civilian areas.[QUOTE="Person0"] Its mostly artillery rockets or bombs. Bombs need aircraft, rockets artillery needs a launcher. He hasn't hidden thosePerson0
That's what happens when you announce what you're going to do 2+ weeks before you do it.
I doubt all of his weapons are moved underground because that would give the rebels a huge advantage without aircraft bombings and artillery hitting them constantly.We aren't targeting airbases. So the air force is acting as normal. The delivery systems for chemical weapons will simply be moved out of storage the day after Obama's stupid little strike.We won't even have the UK with us. Their parliament voted no. France's parliament could vote no as well.[QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"]
I have a question.. Why is it when there's something ify in the world.. It's only the U.S and pulling their allies into it. Why does this country have to be the one to do this stuff? if we attack, why can't somebody else take care of it? Do we think we are some chosen god or something?
KC_Hokie
We're doing this alone. Not even a tiny 'coalition of the willing".
Do you have a link where the U.K says they're out? I haven't been reading the news since it's always so biased.[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]We won't even have the UK with us. Their parliament voted no. France's parliament could vote no as well.[QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"]
I have a question.. Why is it when there's something ify in the world.. It's only the U.S and pulling their allies into it. Why does this country have to be the one to do this stuff? if we attack, why can't somebody else take care of it? Do we think we are some chosen god or something?
The_Lipscomb
We're doing this alone. Not even a tiny 'coalition of the willing".
Do you have a link where the U.K says they're out? I haven't been reading the news since it's always so biased. UK parliament voted like a week ago.[QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"] We won't even have the UK with us. Their parliament voted no. France's parliament could vote no as well.Do you have a link where the U.K says they're out? I haven't been reading the news since it's always so biased. UK parliament voted like a week ago. Did they? I wasn't paying attention then.We're doing this alone. Not even a tiny 'coalition of the willing".
KC_Hokie
[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"] There are no plans to bomb airbases. Scuds and other missiles have already been moved underground or into civilian areas.I doubt all of his weapons are moved underground because that would give the rebels a huge advantage without aircraft bombings and artillery hitting them constantly.We aren't targeting airbases. So the air force is acting as normal. The delivery systems for chemical weapons will simply be moved out of storage the day after Obama's stupid little strike. If we use any aircraft during the strike we aren't going to leave their air force untouched since that would be a threat to our aircraft. Grouping things together might help us take out delivery systems, we probably know where they put them so some nice bunker busters would take out underground systems.That's what happens when you announce what you're going to do 2+ weeks before you do it.
KC_Hokie
[QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"][QUOTE="Person0"] Someone doesn't know what genocide is.Person0I know what bombing a country altogether means. But you don't know what genocide is.Apologies, I always forget how hundreds of thousands of civillian casualties are irrelevant because it's not teh systematic. :roll:
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Person0"] I doubt all of his weapons are moved underground because that would give the rebels a huge advantage without aircraft bombings and artillery hitting them constantly.Person0We aren't targeting airbases. So the air force is acting as normal. The delivery systems for chemical weapons will simply be moved out of storage the day after Obama's stupid little strike. If we use any aircraft during the strike we aren't going to leave their air force untouched since that would be a threat to our aircraft. Grouping things together might help us take out delivery systems, we probably know where they put them so some nice bunker busters would take out underground systems. The strike is going to be via cruise missiles (can't hit underground targets). And they aren't touching the air force.
This whole strike is symbolic at best and incredibly stupid.
But you don't know what genocide is.Apologies, I always forget how hundreds of thousands of civillian casualties are irrelevant because it's not teh systematic. :roll: This isn't Iraq...[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"] I know what bombing a country altogether means.Victorious_Fize
It's simple really.Nobody else has the amazing assets that the US does.I have a question.. Why is it when there's something ify in the world.. It's only the U.S and pulling their allies into it. Why does this country have to be the one to do this stuff? If the world feels we need to strike, why can't somebody else take care of it? Do we think we are some chosen god or something?
The_Lipscomb
I've been anti war since I was a kid during 9/11.. and I'm still anti-war now.. The last necessary war we were in most recent times is world war 2.. Once Vietnam hit.. this country has been starting horrible wars that don't really hold our interest.Now this is what you call consistency. Some OTers here switch sides from anti-war to the jingoistically insane as soon as it starts. I don't get the big idea, if you don't war, say and it and keep saying it, comments like "bomb the entire country" is faaaaar from "I don't want us to go to war".[QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"]Ha, how OT Americans went from anti-war to all-out genocide. Classic.The_Lipscomb
[QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"]It's simple really.Nobody else has the amazing assets that the US does.That's not true. The Arab league plus Turkey could perform these strikes. We know they could....we sold them all the planes.I have a question.. Why is it when there's something ify in the world.. It's only the U.S and pulling their allies into it. Why does this country have to be the one to do this stuff? If the world feels we need to strike, why can't somebody else take care of it? Do we think we are some chosen god or something?
killzowned24
If we use any aircraft during the strike we aren't going to leave their air force untouched since that would be a threat to our aircraft. Grouping things together might help us take out delivery systems, we probably know where they put them so some nice bunker busters would take out underground systems. The strike is going to be via cruise missiles (can't hit underground targets). And they aren't touching the air force.[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]We aren't targeting airbases. So the air force is acting as normal. The delivery systems for chemical weapons will simply be moved out of storage the day after Obama's stupid little strike.KC_Hokie
This whole strike is symbolic at best and incredibly stupid.
Incredibly stupid.. there we go.. That's really all that needs to be said.. Obama and this government are **** idiots.. I feel like we could round up a group of everyday people from around this country and they would do a better job.[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"] Did they? I wasn't paying attention then.killzowned24Yup and it was a big shock for the Prime Minister. He was convinced he was easily going to get the vote. The brits are just being pansies. They still agree that Assad did it.They've already voted no. They aren't with us.
You know something is a really bad idea if the UK isn't even with us.
If we use any aircraft during the strike we aren't going to leave their air force untouched since that would be a threat to our aircraft. Grouping things together might help us take out delivery systems, we probably know where they put them so some nice bunker busters would take out underground systems. The strike is going to be via cruise missiles (can't hit underground targets). And they aren't touching the air force.[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]We aren't targeting airbases. So the air force is acting as normal. The delivery systems for chemical weapons will simply be moved out of storage the day after Obama's stupid little strike.KC_Hokie
This whole strike is symbolic at best and incredibly stupid.
Sends a message about using chemical weapons.[QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"]Apologies, I always forget how hundreds of thousands of civillian casualties are irrelevant because it's not teh systematic. :roll: This isn't Iraq...Haven't you read the thread? People suggested bombing the country altogether, as opposed to military sites. Ironically, they were vehemently anti-war not too long ago. I get that it's anger pouring in, but it's not consistent, is childish, offensive, and downright lacking in principle. It's genocidal to suggest indiscriminately leveling an entire country with all its citizenry. As if it being war-battered not enough.[QUOTE="Person0"] But you don't know what genocide is.Person0
The strike is going to be via cruise missiles (can't hit underground targets). And they aren't touching the air force.[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]
[QUOTE="Person0"] If we use any aircraft during the strike we aren't going to leave their air force untouched since that would be a threat to our aircraft. Grouping things together might help us take out delivery systems, we probably know where they put them so some nice bunker busters would take out underground systems.The_Lipscomb
This whole strike is symbolic at best and incredibly stupid.
Incredibly stupid.. there we go.. That's really all that needs to be said.. Obama and this government are **** idiots.. I feel like we could round up a group of everyday people from around this country and they would do a better job.Obama has no foreign policy and no allies willing to join his idiotic, symbolic strike.[QUOTE="killzowned24"][QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"]It's simple really.Nobody else has the amazing assets that the US does.That's not true. The Arab league plus Turkey could perform these strikes. We know they could....we sold them all the planes. Planes vs Syria air defenses = bad idea. Unless cruise missiles are used to weaken them.I have a question.. Why is it when there's something ify in the world.. It's only the U.S and pulling their allies into it. Why does this country have to be the one to do this stuff? If the world feels we need to strike, why can't somebody else take care of it? Do we think we are some chosen god or something?
KC_Hokie
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The strike is going to be via cruise missiles (can't hit underground targets). And they aren't touching the air force.[QUOTE="Person0"] If we use any aircraft during the strike we aren't going to leave their air force untouched since that would be a threat to our aircraft. Grouping things together might help us take out delivery systems, we probably know where they put them so some nice bunker busters would take out underground systems.Person0
This whole strike is symbolic at best and incredibly stupid.
Sends a message about using chemical weapons.lol...no it doesn't. Watch Assad strike using chemical weapons a few days later.[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]That's not true. The Arab league plus Turkey could perform these strikes. We know they could....we sold them all the planes.KC_HokiePlanes vs Syria air defenses = bad idea. Unless cruise missiles are used to weaken them.No. You can use air to surface missiles without even flying in their airspace. And they can use SAMs back.
[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"]Apologies, I always forget how hundreds of thousands of civillian casualties are irrelevant because it's not teh systematic. :roll:Victorious_FizeThis isn't Iraq...Haven't you read the thread? People suggested bombing the country altogether, as opposed to military sites. Ironically, they were vehemently anti-war not too long ago. I get that it's anger pouring in, but it's not consistent, is childish, offensive, and downright lacking in principle. It's genocidal to suggest indiscriminately leveling an entire country with all its citizenry. As if it being war-battered not enough. You make a great point.. This is what is sad.. People changing their viewpoints to hold interest with others. If you're seriously anti war.. It takes a lot for you to admit that we need to go to war or strike another country.. If syria used a huge chemical weapon, that was seeping into other countries and the world..Then that's when I would start to become concerned and feel hey, youre know threatning our country, we now have a problem type of deal. They use chemical weapons once (shorter radius )..and we start banging the war/drone strikes drums, and don't even really know who even caused it.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment