Syria? Should We or Shouldn't We?

It seems likely at this point but why us?

 

So are you saying it should be Egypt? Iran?

 

I can't even see what that sentence has to do with my sentence.

 

Yep! Mr. Education cannot read. So I guess you would prefer if it were Russia?

 

Words aren't the problem.

 

I got it. You understand the word, but you have this problem putting them together. Would you prefer China?

 

Joe, you asked the question "Syria? Should we or shouldn't we?" So, I'll ask, "Should we or shouldn't we... what?"

Then you made a statement and asked the question, "It seems likely at this point but why us?" So, I'll ask, "What exactly seems likely at this point and what do you mean by "Why us?" Some clarification would help us to answer your questions.

 

Do you see the difference with the way I ask an open question and the way you ask a sarcastic partisan question that pretty much tells everyone in advance how you want them to respond? I didn't need to either attack or support our president nor make it clear that no matter what anyone responds there is an implied "Yeah but...." My question is so open that it actually left room for you to play the ignorant fool. I'll tell ya what. Answer any question with any answer you want and I'll either ignore it or respond. If you stick to your usual pattern, you'll simply keep playing the fool. I could care less.

 

Stop being such an absurd moron. Come on, let's all discuss the Syrian situation. Or would you rather not talk about it?

 

So you did go with ignorant fool. Who knew? Oh yeah, me.

 

This is all but a done deal.

Hagel: US forces ready to strike Syria if ordered

ROBERT BURNS, AP


U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, right, leans to listen to Indonesian De...

BANDER SERI BEGAWAN, Brunei (AP) — U.S. forces are now ready to act on any order by President Barack Obama to strike Syria, U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Tuesday.
The U.S. Navy has four destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean Sea positioned within range of targets inside Syria, as well as U.S. warplanes in the region, Hagel said in an interview with BBC television during his visit to the southeast Asian nation of Brunei.
Hagel also predicted that U.S. intelligence agencies would soon conclude that last week's deadly attack on civilians in a Damascus suburb was a chemical attack by Bashar Assad's government.
"I think it's pretty clear that chemical weapons were used against people in Syria," he said. "I think the intelligence will conclude that it wasn't the (Syria) rebels who used it, and there'll probably be pretty good intelligence to show is that the Syria government was responsible — but we'll allow the time to come together to provide that information."
Obama asked the Pentagon to give him "all options for all contingencies," Hagel said, and "we have done that."
"We are prepared. We have moved assets in place to be able to fulfill and comply with whatever option the president wishes to take," Hagel said.

 

Maybe your eyes aren't so good anymore. Were you able to read where I just said, "Stop being such an absurd moron?" If you would rather not discuss Syria in an intelligent manner, I understand.

 

US strike against Syria 'as early as Thursday'

Published: Tuesday, 27 Aug 2013 | 10:42 AM ET
By: CNBC.com with NBC News and Wires



A U.S. C-17 Globemaster landing at Aqaba, Jordan, in the buildup to possible military intervention in Syria.
Missile strikes against Syria could be launched "as early as Thursday," senior U.S. officials said Tuesday as the White House intensified efforts for an international response to a suspected chemical weapons attack that killed hundreds in a Damascus suburb last week.
The "three days" of strikes would be limited in scope, and aimed at sending a message to the regime of Syria President Bashar Assad, U.S. officials told NBC News.
News of the looming attack sent U.S. stock prices skidding, while oil prices surged to a six-month high and Treasury prices rose.
More from CNBC.com:Market jitters on Syria
Oil spikes as markets fear imminent strike against Syria
Cramer: Agriculture the 'go-to' sector, despite Syria
The U.S. officials' comments about the possible timing for military action came a day after another round of telephone diplomacy by President Barack Obama, who held discussions with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and French President Francois Hollande.
On Tuesday, France declared the that use of chemical weapons was unacceptable. Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal said a "decisive and serious" international stand was required against Damascus. The Arab League blamed the Syrian government for the deadly attack and said that those responsible should face international justice. It called on U.N. Security Council members to overcome their differences and take action to end the killing there.
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, meanwhile, told the BBC the U.S. military is "ready to go" if Obama orders action.
We have moved assets in place to be able to fulfill and comply with whatever option the president wishes to take," Hagel said during a trip to Brunei, according to a partial transcript provided by the BBC. Asked if the U.S. military was ready to respond just "like that," Hagel said: "We are ready to go, like that."

Clear evidence of chemical weapons in Syria: Kerry
NBC's Richard Engel reports tensions are growing over Syria, as the U.S. discusses ways the Syrian government should be held accountable for suspected chemical attacks.
Hagel's comments came a day after Secretary of State John Kerry laid the groundwork for possible military action against the Syrian government by saying Obama believed there needed to be "accountability" for the use of chemical weapons.
Hagel said the United States would have intelligence to present "very shortly" about the attack. But he noted after calls with his British and French counterparts that there was little doubt among most U.S. allies that "the most base ... international humanitarian standard was violated."
(Read more: Syria premium seen building in oil, gold)
Western powers told the Syrian opposition to expect a strike against Assad's forces within days, according to sources who attended a meeting between envoys and the Syrian National Coalition in Istanbul.
"The opposition was told in clear terms that action to deter further use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime could come as early as in the next few days, and that they should still prepare for peace talks at Geneva," one of the sources who was at the meeting on Monday told Reuters.

 

You post a couple of news stories about info we already know. But, what's your opinion on the (possible) impending attack?

 

View attachment 1946

 

What's yours?
View attachment 1947

 

Stop acting like a child, National Socialist Joe. You believe that a US attack against Syria is imminent and a foregone conclusion. The man you praise so much is sitting in the Oval Office about to give the order to attack another country. Many lives will be lost and the geopolitical balance in the region will probably shift. The cost in lives and dollars will be tremendous. The action our president takes within the next several days or hours will change the fragile relationship we have with Russia.

Should we attack Syria?

 

Are you too cowardly to express your opinion? Like usual, all you want to do is attack someone else's opinion while hiding behind the lack of your own opinion on display. Your personal courage is just so entertaining.

 

We all already know what happens in these situations. You don't need to sum it up for us. Let's hear your opinion of the Syrian situation and what we should or shouldn't do. We already know it doesn't matter what Obama does or doesn't do, you'll attack him for doing it. That's a given. Let's hear what you think we should do. Come on. Man up.

 

I guess you can just keep calling me cute names. There's a strategy.