This country has got to stop!

[Blanca BusaLess]

Dictating which Dictator has to go and levying sanctions against the countries they live in which only wind up hurting the innocent civilians. Enough already! We are still embroiled in a no obvious end conflict in Iraq. We are fighting 'willing to die for nothing' Talibs on their homeground with no end in sight. We have aligned ourselves with a zero leadership completely chaotic rebel force in Libya which will continue in stalemate for years to come only ending in a complete destruction of the infrastructure of that country, same as previous two countries mentioned above. And now THE US CALLS FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST SYRIA AND SAYS ASSAD MUST GO! Who the F are we as a nation to continue going around the world telling leaders they have to go. No matter how bad they are we have no right in my opinion to be doing this. It seems we are months away from firing missiles into Damascus? Assad is a murderer. No problem saying it. He needs to go. No problem saying it. But it is not our job, duty or role to be going around ousting folks. I was born and raised a red blooded American but I carry my fathers Syrian blood in me. If my country starts killing innocent Syrians in the name of removing a dictator I may wain a bit. If we start destroying infrastructure all in the name of handicapping the capabilities of a dictator to function I may wain a bit. We went into Libya to 'protect civilians from massacre' but quickly changed to outright destruction, bombing and collaterally killing hundreds. Where does it stop? When does it stop? Does Syria's govt support terrorist orgs? Most likely. Does this give us patent right to dictate which dictator has to go?

I say no. Leave Syria alone.

A quote that puts things in a reverse perspective.

What if?

WE HEAR AND SEE THAT*SCORES OF PEOPLE HAVE BEEN KILLED BY THE POLICE IN THE UK AND*THOUSANDS OF OTHERS HAVE BEEN ARRESTED. FURTHER , SO MANY STORES AROUND LONDON AND OTHER CITIES HAVE BEEN LOOTED AND BURNED, PLUS WHOLE SECTIONS OF LONDON. THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE ARE BRAVING POLICE FIRE AND VIOLENCE AND SACRIFICING THEIR LIVES FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE IN THE UK.
WE DEMAND THAT SYRIA AND ALL OTHER ARAB COUNTRIES SEND MILITARY FORCES TO PROTECT BRITISH CITIZENS FROM BEING KILLED BY THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT, AS WELL AS A UN SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION, UNDER CHAPTER 7, WARNING THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT TO CEASE AND DESIST FROM KILLING ITS OWN CITIZENS. ALSO THE UN MUST DEMAND REFORMS IN THE UK, AND AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, OR THE UK MAY FACE SANCTIONS, ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL FROM ALL OF THE ARAB COUNTRIES AS LED BY THE ARAB LEAGUE.
THE ARAB LEAGUE HAS ISSUED A WARNING TO ALL OF THE ARAB CITIZENS NOW IN THE UK, TO LEAVE THE UK WITHIN 24 HOURS*IN THE FACE OF*FURTHER ESCALATION OF VIOLENCE IN THE UK CITIES.
THE ARAB LEAGUE HAS ORDERED THE ARAB NAVY TO MOBILIZE AND SAIL TOWARD BRITISH SHORE IN ORDER TO HELP EVACUATE ARAB CITIZENS FROM UK TERRITORIES , AND USE FORCE IF NECESSARY.
ALL*ARAB EMBASSIES HAVE ANNOUNCED THAT THEY WILL EXTEND THEIR WORKING HOURS IN THE UK TO 18 HOURS DAILY,*0600 TO 2400 IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE ALL OF THESE BRITISH CITIZENS SEEKING ASYLUM IN SYRIA, TUNISIA, YEMEN, EGYPT AND THE WEST BANK.
**

We will have no right to complain when China invades us and tries to teach us better.

 

[moloko]

We needed to stop a long time ago. A long long time ago. It's not a war on terror, it's a war on human rights. A never ending war is exactly what they need to justify having more power, 'protecting' us and to build a huge military force.
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[skydivr]

We have no strategic interest in Syria. We had an interest in Iraq, and one in Afghanistan. We didn't have one in Libya, either, but the French sure did, we should have set this one out and let them earn their NATO membership every once in awhile...

But I haven't heard a peek out of Code Red in awhile, have I? Or Cindy Sheehan?? Not that Obama's doing it, all of a sudden it's ok?

 

[Bosshound]

BLANCA.............Shut Up

 

[Blanca BusaLess]

Iraq does not differ from any one of the other 100 countries in the world who have evil dictators ruling so Skydivr please tell me what legitimate interest we had in Iraq?
If you say WMD I'm gonna

 

[dadofthree]

It's so we can have $4 / gallon gas

Anyone buying gold

 

[Tony Nitrous]

It's so we can have $4 / gallon gas

Probably closer to the truth.

If the US had any genuine interest they would have stuck their
nose in when the Turks invaded Cyprus or the Chinese into Tibet.

Oh, sorry, i forgot, Cyprus has nothing to offer
and the Chinese already own the US on paper.

 

[BusaWhipped]

We will have no right to complain when China invades us and tries to teach us better.

They won't invade, they will just foreclose.

 

[BusaWhipped]

Now that Obama's doing it, all of a sudden it's ok?

Amazing how silent the media is on what Obama's doing. His new military attacks are back page news and nobody cares about his exit strategy.

 

[Blanca BusaLess]

Amazing how silent the media is on what Obama's doing. His new military attacks are back page news and nobody cares about his exit strategy.

You should clarify that by saying it's amazing how nobody here cares. It is because we are dropping bombs on Muslim countries that nobody here cares.
If we were to say to Britain stop killing your own or we are gonna come bomb you it would be different.

The uk as we speak is shooting it's own civilians rioting in the streets. The govt is using everything at it's disposal to stop it. If situation worsens the govt will strengthen it's resolve and begin to do more stronger action to quell the violence. How is that any different than Libya or Syria? I suggest race and religion have alot to do with it and how we as Americans are asked to perceive the situations. Syria kills it's own so omg Assad has to go or we are coming. The uk kills it own and nobody considers it the same?

 

[skydivr]

Iraq does not differ from any one of the other 100 countries in the world who have evil dictators ruling so Skydivr please tell me what legitimate interest we had in Iraq?
If you say WMD I'm gonna

Heck no not WMD; O-I-L (or access to it -Saudis). Iraq with one of the largest (but paper tiger) armies in the world at the time was threatening the Saudis/Kuwait and our primary Oil supplier(s) on the peninsula. Completely threatened the entire worlds' (and the driver of the entire US Economic Engine) supply of oil.

Comparing what's going on in GB with what going on in Syria is a poor comparison.

And lastly, forgive me a little, but most Americans don't have much sympthy for Muslims killing Muslims after 9-11.

 

[Blanca BusaLess]

Keith do your research. Iraq only threatened Kuwait and rightfully so as they were in direct violation of OPEC agreements. The Arab league did nothing and Saddams complaints fell on deaf ears so he acted. Again researching it you will see the USA told him directly thru ambassador April Gladspie that as long as he didnt threaten Israel we would stay out of it.
Whoops...gotcha...now here we come.

I don't see a poor comparison to the uk and Syria. The uk rioting is in it's first stages, Syria's is more widespread and older thereby seeming more worse. Both govts now are attempting to quell unrest and violence and both are using police action to accomplish this.
Give it another month or two in the uk and tanks will be rolling down the streets the same.

Understanding the Arab world did not come forth properly and denounce 9/11 and some a few even celebrated it, most knew it was a dark day for them because that one act changed American opinion of Muslims for a long time to come. 9/11 did not change the fact that the majority of Muslims are peaceful folks who just want same as you to live in peace. Sure there are radicals out there but we have our own set of radicals here. Does that change you and I?

 

[skydivr]

Saiid, you know Saddam's not defendable, even with that idiot Gillespie (Clinton appointee) and the massive mistake SHE made. If it wasn't for the OIL we'd let them all kill each other. Why do you think you never hear of ANY invervention in Africa?

I don't think we have any business in Syria like we don't have any business in Libya. But I would like Assad's Govt to go down (he really likes to export terrorism and helps Hezbollah).

The scary part is: Who takes his place? Will it be worse? We saw it happen in Yugoslavia, where once Tito's tight-fisted reign was gone, centuries of religious and ethnic hatred that had been fermenting under the surface was let loose; What's going to happen in Egypt? Is the Muslim Brotherhood going to take control? Who the heck knows.

Assad's got a police state; completely disarmed the electorate/public
GB has made private gun ownership very difficult.

One of the reasons for the 2nd amendment is that it's hard to subjagate a population if they are all ARMED. When we start having riots in the streets here, it's gonna be a whole different story....

 

[BusaWhipped]

You should clarify that by saying it's amazing how nobody here cares. It is because we are dropping bombs on Muslim countries that nobody here cares.

Not true. Most Americans only know what the media chooses to report on TV news. The media decides what we care about by reporting or failing to report on issues.

When Bush was in office, the media told us every day that war-monger Bush was at war with Afghanistan and Iraq and gave us daily updates on how many Americans were killed. We were reminded over and over again by the Democrats, via the media, that Bush had no exit strategy.

In contrast, since Obama has been in office you wouldn't know we are still at war with Iraq and Afghanistan. Or that Obama went into Libya and didn't get Congressional approval within the 90 days the President has for military action without it but didn't pull out.

 

[Blanca BusaLess]

Saiid, you know Saddam's not defendable, even with that idiot Gillespie (Clinton appointee) and the massive mistake SHE made. If it wasn't for the OIL we'd let them all kill each other. Why do you think you never hear of ANY invervention in Africa?

I don't think we have any business in Syria like we don't have any business in Libya. But I would like Assad's Govt to go down (he really likes to export terrorism and helps Hezbollah).

The scary part is: Who takes his place? Will it be worse? We saw it happen in Yugoslavia, where once Tito's tight-fisted reign was gone, centuries of religious and ethnic hatred that had been fermenting under the surface was let loose; What's going to happen in Egypt? Is the Muslim Brotherhood going to take control? Who the heck knows.

Assad's got a police state; completely disarmed the electorate/public
GB has made private gun ownership very difficult.

One of the reasons for the 2nd amendment is that it's hard to subjagate a population if they are all ARMED. When we start having riots in the streets here, it's gonna be a whole different story....

Wasn't defending Saddam but rather defending his right as a leader of a country to ask other nations to abide by signed agreements. After coming out of a ten yr war wit Iran Iraqs economy was in the crapper. OPEC and Arab League drew up agreements specifically stating how much oil each nation could sell on the world market daily. Kuwait was purposefully selling almost double their share and driving down the price of Iraqi oil as a result of other long standing hatreds. Iraq went to OPEC and The Arab League time and time again asking them to enforce written agreements and make Kuwait stop. As a result of Saddam being a long time thorn in the side of the old timers they never helped him. He came to the USA asking first for advice and later permission to do what he thought he needed to do. Our ambassador told him what I already said above. World politics and the games people play are incredible to believe but the history and records are there. Saddam was a butthead. He screwed himself time and time again and in the end he got what was coming to him, whether or not he deserved it is another thing.

The rest of your post I agree with.

Not true. Most Americans only know what the media chooses to report on TV news. The media decides what we care about by reporting or failing to report on issues.

When Bush was in office, the media told us every day that war-monger Bush was at war with Afghanistan and Iraq and gave us daily updates on how many Americans were killed. We were reminded over and over again by the Democrats, via the media, that Bush had no exit strategy.

In contrast, since Obama has been in office you wouldn't know we are still at war with Iraq and Afghanistan. Or that Obama went into Libya and didn't get Congressional approval within the 90 days the President has for military action without it but didn't pull out.

Agreed. What a vast difference between news today and news a few years ago.
I do wonder if a republican president had opened up a third front war without approval how loud the democrats would have cried?

 

[RussellJ]

I welcome China with open arms!

 

[Rothman]

The writers of South Park had it correct.... Team America World Police. That's exactly what we're doing, policing the world and nation building, it's all BS. We're headed down the slippery slope to socialism and people are still completely blind to it. It makes me sick. Whatever happened to taking care of ourselves?


Ron Paul 2012!!!!!