[kittygilchrist]

Originally Posted by zcaveman

This seems to be your standard answer. Are you afraid to look at the facts? Please google Syria Al Qaeda and read some of the hits.

Z

only if you keep posting blogs will I answer that way...I'm not interested in fishing for info to support your point.

[wendyquat]

Originally Posted by patfla06

I'm just tired of seeing the U.S. as the "world's policemen."
We put our troops at risk for countries that hate us to begin
with and never appreciate our efforts.

We need to stay out of other countries problems!
We never seem to have an understanding of the problems
To begin with.

I am empathetic with populations/countries that do not
have our democracy and freedom.

That being said DEMOCRACY does NOT WORK with people
who do not believe in the sanctity of life.


We need to stay out of Syria!

[Madelaine Amee]

Originally Posted by kittygilchrist

that is a blog. a blog has as much credibility as something said on facebook or twitter or totv.

Both of these editorials which you consider as being blogs, are editorials written by reputable reporters who are well versed in their subject, and their editorials are then printed in reputable media outlets. The fact that the general public is allowed to express their opinions does not make it a blog.

The following is a definition of a blog: "It is a "web-log" where you have a page online. You share your thoughts and ideas. You can have a theme..... shopping or travel. Or you can just talk about your daily life. You can buy a domain for $10 and pay a host $10 a month to set up a website. Or you can go to one of 10 places for blogs (blogger, tumblr, wordpress, etc) and they will help you set it up."

These editorials which you are writing off as blogs, are excellent editorials written by reputable knowledgeable people. If you search the net you will find other excellent articles written by people who have made the middle east their life study and probably know it better than than any of us.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by kittygilchrist

that is a blog. a blog has as much credibility as something said on facebook or twitter or totv.

I am not sure what you mean. I pretty much allow some credence if NPR does, and while you can dismiss me and the BLOG, your obviously totally and completely not understanding posts and more interested in going after the posters integrity.

I said when I posted that link.....

"There is actually a report on NPR that suggests the chemical attack is the work of the rebels"

This statement was made was made in the context of insuring you know who you are supporting. You must not understand context at all. I never said the statement was accurate in anyway, and offered it as one scenario that is floated.

Sorry that you were blind to that. I will go slower and be clearer next time as your goal is not to discuss.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by Madelaine Amee

Both of these editorials which you consider as being blogs, are editorials written by reputable reporters who are well versed in their subject, and their editorials are then printed in reputable media outlets. The fact that the general public is allowed to express their opinions does not make it a blog.

The following is a definition of a blog: "It is a "web-log" where you have a page online. You share your thoughts and ideas. You can have a theme..... shopping or travel. Or you can just talk about your daily life. You can buy a domain for $10 and pay a host $10 a month to set up a website. Or you can go to one of 10 places for blogs (blogger, tumblr, wordpress, etc) and they will help you set it up."

These editorials which you are writing off as blogs, are excellent editorials written by reputable knowledgeable people. If you search the net you will find other excellent articles written by people who have made the middle east their life study and probably know it better than than any of us.

I get in trouble on here, but some are not interested in discussion but making some point that I do not get.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by kittygilchrist

only if you keep posting blogs will I answer that way...I'm not interested in fishing for info to support your point.

I AM interested in "fishing for info"

That, to me is the purpose of a message board.

[Moderator]

Please, address the topic and not each other.

[rp001]

Originally Posted by kittygilchrist

USS Liberty incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rp, Thanks for the post..6 day war. No wonder I didn't remember that.
1967.

The fact is Israel attacked the US. The real question is, was it it intentional. The survivors all believe it was, as OUR ship was clearly identified and there were several gun runs done by ISRAELI PILOTS on an unarmed vessel in international waters. I don't look on Israel as the ally everyone wants them to seem. It is a matter of convenience only, and I treat them as any other country trying to influence our foreign policy, always looking out for their interests. I refuse to let them or any other country drag us into a war where we are the ones paying the bills, either monetarily, or with the lives of our young and precious, with no end or gains in sight. Forget remember the Alamo, REMEMBER VIETNAM!!!!

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by rp001

The fact is Israel attacked the US. The real question is, was it it intentional. The survivors all believe it was, as the ship was clearly identified and there were several gun runs done by them on an unarmed vessel in international waters. I don't look on Israel as the ally everyone wants them to seem. It is a matter of convenience only, and I treat them as any other country trying to influence our
foreign policy, always looking out for their interests. I refuse to let them or any other country drag us into a war where we are the ones paying the bills, either monetarily or with the lives of our young and precious with no end or gains in sight. Forget remember the Alamo, REMEMBER VIETNAM!!!!

In this particular case, not so sure Israel was involved in any decision. They become a player based on past response to US actions.

Syria has been a problem for years and with no action, this day of decision had to come. I think I started a thread on the makeup of the rebels a year or so.

But to your point, since we have muddled, we need, or will need,to address Egypt, Libya etc. We need to decide if it is in our interests to stop this crap before it gets to our shore or wait. That is not an endorsement to attack, at least not in the manner I understand is proposed. It's just that this is not going to stop

[Monkei]

Originally Posted by Tracy1581

If he is in between a rock and a hard place it's because he made the statement a year ago about crossing the RED LINE and then NOT following through on it. You cannot pretend your going to do something and then do NOTHING. Mixed signals to our allies and enemies is a huge mistake. As is taking 9-10 days to get Congress together while you leave for a tee time. I don't find funny the fact that none of our allies will stand by us. They are just as confused as everyone else. We are in desperate need of a leader in foreign affairs. This whole situation is critical and NOT calling Congress for an emergency meeting is another mistake that may be very costly.

Congress can call themselves together at any time. They do not need the presidents approval. Gassing your own citizens and using gas in warfare is a line that has been drawn before Obama was president

This country has not had a leader in foreign affairs since Eisenhower. He was the last president who actually "got it".

Besides since when has congress worked with this president. They would much rather hang him out to dry on everything unfortunately at this country's sake.

[rp001]

Originally Posted by Bucco

In this particular case, not so sure Israel was involved in any decision. They become a player based on past response to US actions.

Syria has been a problem for years and with no action, this day of decision had to come. I think I started a thread on the makeup of the rebels a year or so.

But to your point, since we have muddled, we need, or will need,to address Egypt, Libya etc. We need to decide if it is in our interests to stop this crap before it gets to our shore or wait. That is not an endorsement to attack, at least not in the manner I understand is proposed. It's just that this is not going to stop

I'm sorry but Istak Rabin was involved in the decision. The Israeli government paid over 20 million dollars in damages to the families, the survivors, and the US gov't for repairs to our ship. How can you say they "were not involved in the decision"? Again, Israel remains a friend out of convenience, TO THEM!!! Arabs killing Arabs, sounds like a civil war to me.

[wendyquat]

Let's just suppose, hypothetical of course, we do strike and it escalates to a "boots on the ground" war in Syria! (Never say never!). Can we ask our fine military to fight hand in hand WITH Al Qaeda? I hope not!

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by rp001

I'm sorry but Istak Rabin was involved in the decision. The Israeli government paid over 20 million dollars in damages to the families, the survivors, and the US gov't for repairs to our ship. How can you say they "were not involved in the decision"? Again, Israel remains a friend out of convenience, TO THEM!!! Arabs killing Arabs, sounds like a civil war to me.

Wasn't disputing your story, just talking about Syria in regards to Israel.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by wendyquat

Let's just suppose, hypothetical of course, we do strike and it escalates to a "boots on the ground" war in Syria! (Never say never!). Can we ask our fine military to fight hand in hand WITH Al Qaeda? I hope not!

Not as specific as your point is, but my big question is who we are helping with whatever we do.

[Monkei]

Originally Posted by wendyquat

Let's just suppose, hypothetical of course, we do strike and it escalates to a "boots on the ground" war in Syria! (Never say never!). Can we ask our fine military to fight hand in hand WITH Al Qaeda? I hope not!

Or maybe it turns out like Lybia did?