US Airstrikes Against ISIS Targets Under Way in Syria

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
barfo said:
Why do you ask?

barfo
Click to expand...

because he has to coordinate it with the correct bullet point from the chain email he got?
 
magnifier661 said:
I don't send out chain emails... Do you? How about you? You support your commander and chief?
Click to expand...

I'm really not sure why you think that's a valid question to ask. If I say i don't support this choice, it doesn't change anything. If I say I do support it, it doesn't change anything.

Since most liberals I know aren't in favor of war, period, that should be a clear indication about what my answer would be. But it's not like one has to 100% agree with the President (or someone in the party you consider yourself affiliated with), nor does the President (etc) doing something you don't yourself believe in, mean you are now against said President.

So you asking these questions, which come off as attempted "gotcha!" questions (™ Sarah Palin), doesn't really make sense.

If I don't agree with making a military strike here (which since I didn't agree with Afghanistan or Iraq, shouldn't be a surprise), it doesn't make voting for him wrong, or your vote for your candidate correct.
 
julius said:
I'm really not sure why you think that's a valid question to ask. If I say i don't support this choice, it doesn't change anything. If I say I do support it, it doesn't change anything.

Since most liberals I know aren't in favor of war, period, that should be a clear indication about what my answer would be. But it's not like one has to 100% agree with the President (or someone in the party you consider yourself affiliated with), nor does the President (etc) doing something you don't yourself believe in, mean you are now against said President.

So you asking these questions, which come off as attempted "gotcha!" questions ([emoji769] Sarah Palin), doesn't really make sense.

If I don't agree with making a military strike here (which since I didn't agree with Afghanistan or Iraq, shouldn't be a surprise), it doesn't make voting for him wrong, or your vote for your candidate correct.
Click to expand...

A simple yes or no would be sufficient. I too don't support the bombings.

What I don't get is why democrats are either beating around the bush about their answer or playing dumb. Then there are ones like you that give 2 paragraphs to answer why you don't support it but can support your president.

I've come to expect these types of answers. It's pretty common
 
Denny Crane said:
If you're against the bombing, you're not saying so. You're happy to let it go on, as you said.
Click to expand...

If I came down against the air strikes on an internet message board, the bombings would stop, according to Denny.
 
Minstrel said:
If I came down against the air strikes on an internet message board, the bombings would stop, according to Denny.
Click to expand...

No, it's that you don't want to voice your opinion because it goes against the grain of your political party you support. As Denny pointed out earlier, you had no problem voicing your opinion on burger king and tax evasion. Why is this any different?
 
magnifier661 said:
No, it's that you don't want to voice your opinion because it goes against the grain of your political party you support. As Denny pointed out earlier, you had no problem voicing your opinion on burger king and tax evasion. Why is this any different?
Click to expand...

Because there, there's a pretty clear concept that I'm against, companies exploiting loopholes to avoid taxation.

When it comes to war, I think it should be avoided where possible but it's not always possible. So it's a tough call and I'm not at all sure of the right course here. Considering I had the same viewpoint for Bush's war, it's probably not due to party lines.
 
Minstrel said:
If I came down against the air strikes on an internet message board, the bombings would stop, according to Denny.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that, now did I?

If you came down against the air strikes, you would be on record as being against them from the start.
 
magnifier661 said:
Okay so you support your commander and chief. I find it pretty ironic how many democrats are playing dumb right now
Click to expand...

You did not phrase that as a question, so you lose.

barfo
 
SlyPokerDog said:
Denny, you should set up a forum for ISIS. ISIS2.com! Marazul will moderate for you.
Click to expand...

I am more of antagonist than moderator. I totally lack the will to be fair.

Just read the 1st chapter of the Art of War to brush up. Two main issues standout here on day one.

. The sovereign with moral authority has the best chance to win. The Citizens will follow him.
Obama is way short of 50%. I don't even know who the opposite sovereign is.

. The Best General usually wins if the sovereign's cause is just.
Lets see, General Schwartzkopf lead the 1st war in the Gulf, Tommy Franks I think started the 2nd . I don't know who is the commander of this operation? God help us, I think it may be
Valerie Jarrett.

Valerie_Jarrett_official_portrait_small.jpg
 
Last edited:
Minstrel said:
You said exactly that.
Click to expand...

How? Do you read every fourth word or something?

If you're really anti-war, you might go out and protest. Carry a sign or something.

Speaking of which, where are the tens of thousands of anti war protesters normally to be found?

Can we give Obama a second Nobel Prize?
 
Denny Crane said:
If you're really anti-war, you might go out and protest. Carry a sign or something.
Click to expand...

Well, as I said, I'm not strictly anti-war. I'm more of a "war is to be avoided if possible, but it's not always possible" sort of person.
 
Denny Crane said:
How? Do you read every fourth word or something?

If you're really anti-war, you might go out and protest. Carry a sign or something.

Speaking of which, where are the tens of thousands of anti war protesters normally to be found?

Can we give Obama a second Nobel Prize?
Click to expand...

Or will they take back the first?
 
Minstrel said:
Well, as I said, I'm not strictly anti-war. I'm more of a "war is to be avoided if possible, but it's not always possible" sort of person.
Click to expand...

I'll bring up at some later date how you weren't against this military action.

It wasn't possible to avoid war in Iraq in 2003 by your reasoning. You just said it.
 
magnifier661 said:
A simple yes or no would be sufficient. I too don't support the bombings.

What I don't get is why democrats are either beating around the bush about their answer or playing dumb. Then there are ones like you that give 2 paragraphs to answer why you don't support it but can support your president.

I've come to expect these types of answers. It's pretty common
Click to expand...

Because it's not an all or nothing thing?

I'm not a single issue voter. It's not like I'm going to all the sudden be against a candidate I like because he (or she) makes a choice I don't agree with. The world isn't black and white to me. I can disagree with a candidate that I supported in the past, and still be able to support the in the future (or the party itself).

I'm not sure why you think it's so black and white (no pun intended) when it comes to whether or not you "support" a President. Are you suggesting that we either have to 100% agree with everything a President does/says/believes/endorses or 100% disagree with him (or her) if they do something we don't agree with?

What kind of standard is that? Impossible, thats what kind.
 
Denny Crane said:
It wasn't possible to avoid war in Iraq in 2003 by your reasoning. You just said it.
Click to expand...

Nope. My reasoning is that sometimes war is necessary, but it's not always clear immediately. Now we know better on Iraq, and it probably wasn't necessary.

Maybe the same will prove true of Obama's war.
 
julius said:
Because it's not an all or nothing thing?

I'm not a single issue voter. It's not like I'm going to all the sudden be against a candidate I like because he (or she) makes a choice I don't agree with. The world isn't black and white to me. I can disagree with a candidate that I supported in the past, and still be able to support the in the future (or the party itself).

I'm not sure why you think it's so black and white (no pun intended) when it comes to whether or not you "support" a President. Are you suggesting that we either have to 100% agree with everything a President does/says/believes/endorses or 100% disagree with him (or her) if they do something we don't agree with?

What kind of standard is that? Impossible, thats what kind.
Click to expand...

The first question about a war is, can you win? Then you worry about is it necessary. Fighting any war without coming to grips with how to win it, is completely ignorant.
 
MarAzul said:
The first question about a war is, can you win? Then you worry about is it necessary. Fighting any war without coming to grips with how to win it, is completely ignorant.
Click to expand...

This I do agree with. If you're going to go to war, make sure you know how to win, that you can win, and that you're willing to do WHAT it takes to win.

I'm not sure we (as a country) can do any of those anymore. Both can to or want to.
 
julius said:
Because it's not an all or nothing thing?

I'm not a single issue voter. It's not like I'm going to all the sudden be against a candidate I like because he (or she) makes a choice I don't agree with. The world isn't black and white to me. I can disagree with a candidate that I supported in the past, and still be able to support the in the future (or the party itself).

I'm not sure why you think it's so black and white (no pun intended) when it comes to whether or not you "support" a President. Are you suggesting that we either have to 100% agree with everything a President does/says/believes/endorses or 100% disagree with him (or her) if they do something we don't agree with?

What kind of standard is that? Impossible, thats what kind.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I'm not saying. You can be in support of a president and not support certain policies or decisions. Whats disheartening is that you think because you disagree with one thing, you must be "all in" with everything. That's hardly not the case.

What I would love to see are democrats that actually stand up for what they believe in instead of blindly following and defending their party leader.
 
julius said:
This I do agree with. If you're going to go to war, make sure you know how to win, that you can win, and that you're willing to do WHAT it takes to win.

I'm not sure we (as a country) can do any of those anymore. Both can to or want to.
Click to expand...

More CAN you win, is HOW do you win, and what is defined as a win, I think. Establishing democracy somewhere, eliminating a dictator, etc.
 
Minstrel said:
Nope. My reasoning is that sometimes war is necessary, but it's not always clear immediately. Now we know better on Iraq, and it probably wasn't necessary.

Maybe the same will prove true of Obama's war.
Click to expand...

Offering another opinion?

Sheesh.

Please do offer your opinion of what we should have done in Iraq if not take out Saddam? Realize we put sanctions on him that killed half a million children during those years. We had to institute no-fly zones so he couldn't gas his own people. His military shot at us and we shot back. Clinton signed this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act, calling for regime change. Clinton said he had massive quantities of WMDs and bombed Iraq because it was the only way he felt he could disarm Saddam.

Do tell what we should have done. More people died during the embargo than during the entire war and post war occupation. By several fold.

I'm all ears.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

truebluefan
US airstrikes have killed 500 jihadists in Syria
Replies
0
Views
168
truebluefan
truebluefan
truebluefan
U.S. and Arab allies launch airstrikes against ISIL in Syria
Replies
0
Views
168
truebluefan
truebluefan
truebluefan
Russia: US strikes on pro-regime forces in Syria 'totally unacceptable'
Replies
0
Views
253
truebluefan
truebluefan
The Professional Fan
Politics US service members killed in ISIS-claimed attack in Syria
Replies
20
Views
882
julius
julius
SlyPokerDog
FBI, Homeland Security: No credible threats to the US homeland from ISIS
Replies
4
Views
374
Denny Crane
Denny Crane

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top