[Bucco]

Here is another twist and maybe an pause....not sure how much, but just for context....

"The Syria researcher whose Wall Street Journal op-piece was cited by Secretary of State John Kerry and Sen. John McCain during congressional hearings about the use of force has been fired from the Institute for the Study of War for lying about having a Ph.D., the group announced on Wednesday.

“The Institute for the Study of War has learned and confirmed that, contrary to her representations, Ms. Elizabeth O’Bagy does not in fact have a Ph.D. degree from Georgetown University,” the institute said in a statement. “ISW has accordingly terminated Ms. O’Bagy’s employment, effective immediately.”

Read more: WSJ op-ed writer Elizabeth O


O’Bagy’s Aug. 30 op-ed piece for the Journal, “On the Front Lines of Syria’s Civil War,” was cited by both Kerry and McCain last week. McCain read from the piece last Tuesday to Kerry, calling it “an important op-ed by Dr. Elizabeth O’Bagy.” The next day, Kerry also brought up the piece before a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing and described it as a “very interesting article” and recommended that members read it.

But the piece had also come under fire for misrepresenting her affiliations. Originally the op-ed only listed O’Bagy, 26, as only “a senior analyst” at the ISW, later adding a clarification that disclosed her connection to a Syrian rebel advocacy group."

Dont know at all how much this influences anything but seeing her ties to the rebels and hearing the impact she had on Kerry and McCain gave me pause.

I am big on truth and context thus has more importance to me perhaps.

[Monkei]

Originally Posted by billethkid

I do not think so. There was no hope of the approval being given by the congress and the American people overwhelmingly against it (if that matters).

The suggestion that delaying the vote keeps the threat viable is really humorous. A really confident and effective ploy would have been to continue to press for approval....get the approval....show resolve to make good on the threat....then leave that un-used big stick speak for itself.

However since none of the above was remotely possible the next best fake was again deployed.

I fear that the very public display of military tactics no matter if whether or not or scope or when did nothing except announce to those who would be our advosaries that the USA's internal politics and populist approach are our own worst enemies.
Our embarassing stage plays for the past two weeks allowed any enemy to get ready or hide WMDs or whatever they wanted to do.....all the while laughing at democracy at it's worst playing on the world stage

Since when did military actions become public discourse???

Amateurs!!!

btk

I think the president would have bombed if there was no action from Syria regardless of this do absolutely nothing congress. So much so the Russia was convinced of such and pushed a deal. This president is a great leader fr the US on foreign issues.

[Monkei]

Originally Posted by Bucco

He may have already surpassed that number...only not sure about the term CHILDREN...I know he has killed more folks than lost their lives in Japan.

I agree. Also there is something different in killing an enemy if yours who has sworn and taken oaths to fight on until death than there is gassing your own people. The US bombing in Japan can also be argued to have saved life's in the long run.

[donb9006]

Originally Posted by Bucco

I sincerely hope we are not simply being played....I pray no...

Yes...you are being played...by ALL sides.

Originally Posted by Bucco

I am confused.

Folks on here are speaking of sending "our sons and daughters to war".

Where did that come from ? I missed something as I never heard that discussed and in fact dismissed immediately !

Because that's the way it ALWAYS ends...with boots on the ground. Always has.

Originally Posted by Golfingnut

I think we should wait until Assad kills at least as many children as we did in Nagasaki and Hiroshima before we call him evil.

Yup, we're always the good guys...even though we provoked Japan by cutting them off from getting oil during the year before Pearl Harbor. We provoked them, baited them, as we always do. Not "we" as in you and I, "we" as in our "leaders".

Originally Posted by Monkei

I agree. Also there is something different in killing an enemy if yours who has sworn and taken oaths to fight on until death than there is gassing your own people. The US bombing in Japan can also be argued to have saved life's in the long run.

Again, an enemy WE created because of our treatment of them. We create our own enemies. If China invaded tomorrow you'd swear to fight until your death. We invade...we invade a lot. Japan was losing, they were on the way out. We had cut off their oil AGAIN. We didn't need to bomb Hiroshima or Nagasaki, we wanted to show off our "big stick", not wanting to use the more vulgar term...

We're fed propaganda from the day we're born, just as our "enemies" are.

It's why we're always confused, because reality doesn't match what we're told/taught.

[gomoho]

Originally Posted by Monkei

I think the president would have bombed if there was no action from Syria regardless of this do absolutely nothing congress. So much so the Russia was convinced of such and pushed a deal. This president is a great leader fr the US on foreign issues.

This comment leads me to believe you would have our leader act as a dictator since the majority of this democratic society was against the bombing of Syria and involving our country.