• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Syria: Liberals Are Getting Exactly What They Voted For

MarineTpartier

Haters gon' hate
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 30, 2011
Messages
5,586
Reaction score
2,420
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Due to the fact that most liberals want a big gov't, the current big governments actions regarding Syria should not be a surprise to them. Therefore, in the name of fairness, I'd like to say that it's your fault liberals that we are heading directly into another confrontation with a Middle Eastern country that hasn't actually done anything to us.
It's your fault liberals that, despite the outcries of their constituents, your left leaning Congressmen and women (not to mention your POTUS) are going to move forward with strikes against another Middle Eastern country that can sort out it's own problems. It should be especially troubling to you that Neocons such as John McCain and John Boehner are allying with you.
It's your fault liberals, that more servicemen and women will be put in harms way while launching munitions against another Middle Eastern country. Just because a Navy service member isn't being directly shot at, doesn't mean that a cruise missile can't blow up inside the launcher or detonate prematurely killing him and possibly sinking the whole crew.
It's your fault liberals that you have put us in the situation where we could get sucked into a naval and/or air battle with Russia.
Finally, yes, it's a war. Don't try to call it a "limited strike" or any other crap like that. Why? Because the question you have to ask yourself is this. If another country launched cruise missiles at us, what would it be called? WAR. That's what it would be called. But, in liberalese, launching missiles against a country that can't retaliate is called "limited strikes" or some crap like that. This is going to be a war, no two ways about it. Boots don't have to be on the ground for it to be a war.
 
Due to the fact that most liberals want a big gov't, the current big governments actions regarding Syria should not be a surprise to them. Therefore, in the name of fairness, I'd like to say that it's your fault liberals that we are heading directly into another confrontation with a Middle Eastern country that hasn't actually done anything to us.
It's your fault liberals that, despite the outcries of their constituents, your left leaning Congressmen and women (not to mention your POTUS) are going to move forward with strikes against another Middle Eastern country that can sort out it's own problems. It should be especially troubling to you that Neocons such as John McCain and John Boehner are allying with you.
It's your fault liberals, that more servicemen and women will be put in harms way while launching munitions against another Middle Eastern country. Just because a Navy service member isn't being directly shot at, doesn't mean that a cruise missile can't blow up inside the launcher or detonate prematurely killing him and possibly sinking the whole crew.
It's your fault liberals that you have put us in the situation where we could get sucked into a naval and/or air battle with Russia.
Finally, yes, it's a war. Don't try to call it a "limited strike" or any other crap like that. Why? Because the question you have to ask yourself is this. If another country launched cruise missiles at us, what would it be called? WAR. That's what it would be called. But, in liberalese, launching missiles against a country that can't retaliate is called "limited strikes" or some crap like that. This is going to be a war, no two ways about it. Boots don't have to be on the ground for it to be a war.

Then they will send boots on the ground and I will get recalled.
 
If so, let me know. I'll probably be there with you.:2wave:

I probably be head of you since Im a K-9 Handler so I got to clear that path for you.
 
Retired AF ParaRescue here. We cleaned ya'lls $hit up and hauled your butts out of hot zones when no one else could get in to you.

Thanks to both of you for your service. It will not be forgotten and will always be appreciated.
 
Due to the fact that most liberals want a big gov't, the current big governments actions regarding Syria should not be a surprise to them. Therefore, in the name of fairness, I'd like to say that it's your fault liberals that we are heading directly into another confrontation with a Middle Eastern country that hasn't actually done anything to us.
It's your fault liberals that, despite the outcries of their constituents, your left leaning Congressmen and women (not to mention your POTUS) are going to move forward with strikes against another Middle Eastern country that can sort out it's own problems. It should be especially troubling to you that Neocons such as John McCain and John Boehner are allying with you.
It's your fault liberals, that more servicemen and women will be put in harms way while launching munitions against another Middle Eastern country. Just because a Navy service member isn't being directly shot at, doesn't mean that a cruise missile can't blow up inside the launcher or detonate prematurely killing him and possibly sinking the whole crew.
It's your fault liberals that you have put us in the situation where we could get sucked into a naval and/or air battle with Russia.
Finally, yes, it's a war. Don't try to call it a "limited strike" or any other crap like that. Why? Because the question you have to ask yourself is this. If another country launched cruise missiles at us, what would it be called? WAR. That's what it would be called. But, in liberalese, launching missiles against a country that can't retaliate is called "limited strikes" or some crap like that. This is going to be a war, no two ways about it. Boots don't have to be on the ground for it to be a war.

As opposed to Republican leadership. They are very against war and have shown their propensity for small government when?
 
As opposed to Republican leadership. They are very against war and have shown their propensity for small government when?
So they should continue to be for war and vote for this one with your boy? Or when they vote for small gov't you demonize them for it? Btw, I'm not in the business of defending Republicans as you well know. However, the counter point is valid.
 
So they should continue to be for war and vote for this one with your boy? Or when they vote for small gov't you demonize them for it? Btw, I'm not in the business of defending Republicans as you well know. However, the counter point is valid.

My guy huh? You defend Republicans far more than I do Dems. lol

I'm not for this catastrophuck in Syria.
 
My guy huh? You defend Republicans far more than I do Dems. lol
Hey (in Si Roberson voice), Lean: Liberal= voted for President Obama lol. And I resent that last remark.
I'm not for this catastrophuck in Syria.
In all seriousness, that is the point of my post. President Obama and his lib minions have always shown the propensity to think they know what's best for us despite the fact that we don't want what they think is best for us (AHA comes to mind). So this little excursion he is going around the world trumpeting is just another example of him saying to us, "Poor souls. They just don't know what's going on. It's okay, I'll help them along."
 
Hey (in Si Roberson voice), Lean: Liberal= voted for President Obama lol. And I resent that last remark.

In all seriousness, that is the point of my post. President Obama and his lib minions have always shown the propensity to think they know what's best for us despite the fact that we don't want what they think is best for us (AHA comes to mind). So this little excursion he is going around the world trumpeting is just another example of him saying to us, "Poor souls. They just don't know what's going on. It's okay, I'll help them along."

That could be said of every single president in our history. You're not making any new point here just because it's Obama in the White House now.
 
Retired AF ParaRescue here. We cleaned ya'lls $hit up and hauled your butts out of hot zones when no one else could get in to you.

Thanks to both of you for your service. It will not be forgotten and will always be appreciated.
When were you a PJ? My cousin was one years ago. Oddly enough, he went by his first initials, PJ. And this was prior to his joining lol.
 
That could be said of every single president in our history. You're not making any new point here just because it's Obama in the White House now.
Yeah, but, A) He's the POTUS now and B) He's low hanging fruit for a right wing extremist like me:2razz:
 
Due to the fact that most liberals want a big gov't, the current big governments actions regarding Syria should not be a surprise to them. Therefore, in the name of fairness, I'd like to say that it's your fault liberals that we are heading directly into another confrontation with a Middle Eastern country that hasn't actually done anything to us.
It's your fault liberals that, despite the outcries of their constituents, your left leaning Congressmen and women (not to mention your POTUS) are going to move forward with strikes against another Middle Eastern country that can sort out it's own problems. It should be especially troubling to you that Neocons such as John McCain and John Boehner are allying with you.
It's your fault liberals, that more servicemen and women will be put in harms way while launching munitions against another Middle Eastern country. Just because a Navy service member isn't being directly shot at, doesn't mean that a cruise missile can't blow up inside the launcher or detonate prematurely killing him and possibly sinking the whole crew.
It's your fault liberals that you have put us in the situation where we could get sucked into a naval and/or air battle with Russia.
Finally, yes, it's a war. Don't try to call it a "limited strike" or any other crap like that. Why? Because the question you have to ask yourself is this. If another country launched cruise missiles at us, what would it be called? WAR. That's what it would be called. But, in liberalese, launching missiles against a country that can't retaliate is called "limited strikes" or some crap like that. This is going to be a war, no two ways about it. Boots don't have to be on the ground for it to be a war.
Pearl Harber was a limited strike against the US ;)
 
Pearl Harber was a limited strike against the US ;)

And a damn fine one at that.

Jerry, pay no attention to the amateur behind this post. He needs to circulate the website a while before injecting himself into any thread. I have advised him so. He'll only get you in trouble with a mod.
 
Jerry, pay no attention to the amateur behind this post. He needs to circulate the website a while before injecting himself into any thread. I have advised him so. He'll only get you in trouble with a mod.
Your advice as been placed into the same garbage can as your arguments. Let's mush on.
 
Your advice as been placed into the same garbage can as your arguments. Let's mush on.
Actually, that nugget of advice was for my volatile friend Jerry. You can view the advice addressed to you in the other thread. Lets do mush on. What was the point of your statement "And a damn fine one at that"?
 
Actually, that nugget of advice was for my volatile friend Jerry. You can view the advice addressed to you in the other thread. Lets do mush on. What was the point of your statement "And a damn fine one at that"?
Yep. They spanked us good that day eh? Credit where credit is due.
 
Yep. They spanked us good that day eh? Credit where credit is due.

Most ships returned to service, they missed the carriers and they failed to launch a third wave.
 
Back
Top Bottom