I'd like to know what "strong evidence" "conclusively determined" means? It sounds like they are setting up some margin of error that they could possibly fall back on and say "Whoops!, We thought it was chemical but turned out to be something else". What is stopping Israel’s people, our people or any other people from saying that it is no doubt, nothing else but Sarin that was used? Chemicals leave residues right?
Until there is 100% certainty, stay the course of non-letah and defensive support.
But this just brings back the old question of why WE (USA) are the only ones that are being asked to step in and step up. Where are all the other countries on this issue?
But this just brings back the old question of why WE (USA) are the only ones that are being asked to step in and step up. Where are all the other countries on this issue?
Good question. I don't think we should be involved in any way. If we help the rebels and they win, they will still hate us and will most likely produce terrorists that want to kill us (see Libya). Our helping the rebels will also continue to piss of the rest of the ME because once again, we are trying to control the outcome and we'll never convince the region that our intervention is for their sake and not ours.
But Obama has stated clearly that chemicals weapons used against the rebels will "cross the red line". He's boxed himself in with two choices... get involved in another mess like Libya where the winners will be as bad as the losers, or do nothing and confirm to the world that our president's words mean nothing. I'm sure Iran will be the big winners there too.
Anyway we go, there's going to be bodies piled up high... we should just donate food and body bags for those that are left in the end. And we will still be hated.
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
And no matter what Obama does you will criticize him. You have no credibility when it comes to discussing Obama's choices. You have shown that you will disagree with him over everything.
To me it sounds like not everyone in the administration is convinced Assad is using chemical weapons. In a civil war with many military unit defections the Free Syrian Army could be making Sarin to implicate Assad and get more international support.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
archer wrote: And no matter what Obama does you will criticize him. You have no credibility when it comes to discussing Obama's choices. You have shown that you will disagree with him over everything.
I love you too archer :love2: KissyFace:
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
archer wrote: And no matter what Obama does you will criticize him. You have no credibility when it comes to discussing Obama's choices. You have shown that you will disagree with him over everything.
I love you too archer :love2: KissyFace:
Of course you do...we're two of a kind on opposite sides.
Why do we care if Syria is using chemical weapons on their own people? Sure it's a bad thing done by a bad guy, but I don't see how this directly impacts the US. If the UN wants to do something, they are more than welcome to.
There is an unjustified fear of chemical weapons out there. If they were truly effective in combat more nations would use them. But because of the fear and civilians have little protection Saddam and others have found them useful. Especially in genocide applications.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Something the Dog Said wrote: Syria obviously has the capability to produce small amounts of sarin gas, particularly when it has a relatively short shelf life as opposed to storing for 10 years.
Sarin only has a shelf life of a few months. Do you really think that Syria stored it for 10 years? Right!
When mixed, that is correct. However when sarin is weaponized for use in artillery shells or bombs, it is a binary compound that is only mixed to produce sarin either shortly before the weapon is used or as it is in flight. This allows it to be stored for many years, so this is one possibility that would make it possible for Syria to have used sarin it obtained from Iraq.
The US kept redistilling its sarin from the time it stopped producing the compound in the mid 1950's until 1970, which is another possibility which allows this to be sarin from Iraq.
And then, of course, we have the possibility that Iraq is responsible for Syria obtaining the weapons by giving it the equipment and the training to produce it when they themselves were being "inspected" by the UN.
SecState Kerry has confirmed two instances of the use of Sarin and none other than Senator Feinstein has said it is obvious that the red line has been crossed and that action must be taken to prevent larger scale use.
Obama says that there must be "conslusive" proof. One must presume that means that the Syrian government must admit to the deed before he is convinced that the decision came from the government rather than a rogue military commander.
archer wrote: And no matter what Obama does you will criticize him. You have no credibility when it comes to discussing Obama's choices. You have shown that you will disagree with him over everything.
Not true at all. I'm sure that Rick agrees with his decision not to close Gitmo, that he agreed with the decision to take out bin Laden, that he agreed with his decision at the time to extend tax rate reductions for all Americans, and many of the other decisions he has made just as some of the collectivists have disagreed with many of his decisions and agreed with many others.
What Obama should do this time is not repeat the mistake he made in Libya and bypass Congress before committing the US to a course of action. No action that any president ever takes is universally approved of by every citizen in every State. Heck, there was at least one vote against the US declaring war on Japan after PearlHarbor was bombed. But at least when a president goes to the Congress and asks for their authorization he is at the very least adhering to the spirit of the Constitution.
KissyFace:
