Should we bomb Syria?

The public has been confused about the identity of “Syrian rebels” - who could receive arms and training from the U.S. is the very near future. One conservative watchdog group blames this confusion on broadcasters.
“The United States is poised to fire missiles at Syria in response to chemical attacks on Syrian civilians. But the assault will also pit the U.S. against one side of the civil war and aid the other side, which includes al Qaeda,” says Dan Gainor, vice president for business and culture at the Media Research Center.
“Broadcast news outlets are clearly aware of the Islamic terror group’s role in Syria, but rarely report it. Nearly 94 percent of all Syria stories since the gas attacks have made no mention of al Qaeda whatsoever,” Mr. Gainor continues.
“It’s not like the networks haven’t had time. Since the gas attack on Aug. 21 in Ghoutta, Syria, ABC, CBS and NBC morning and evening news shows have done at least 171 stories on the conflict,” he says. “Just 11 of those stories have made any mention of the terrorists of al Qaeda, and all of those have been passing references. There hasn’t been one story focused exclusively on al Qaeda in Syria during that time.”
The connection is clear and journalists know it, Mr. Gainor says, citing ABC’s chief investigative correspondent Brian Ross, who noted the unusual alliance. “The role of the al Qaeda group fighting against Assad is one of the great ironies of the United States military strike in Syria,” Mr. Ross explained.


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2013/sep/4/94-percent-broadcast-stories-syria-have-made-no-me/#ixzz2dxufjXnz

Well, now it looks like the Republicans in the House might not vote to go to war in Syria. So if that happens his excuse for backing off from his statement is the Republicans fault. If it does happen to go through the Republicans he can say, the Republicans voted to go to war so it is the Republicans fault. It's a no lose situation for him. He has someone to blame- AS USUAL.

WHL wrote:Well, now it looks like the Republicans in the  House might not vote to go to war in Syria.

Generally speaking, the House GOP is against anything Obama is for. That's why Obama tossed this hot potato to the Congress!

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/09/rep-coffman-backs-away-from-military-action-in-syria.php

He passed the buck!

Yes, he did, fsh. NB is also right, the Republicans are generally against anything that Obama is for and therefore he did this to get himself out of the mess he got himself into by drawing the "red line".

Here we go. Looks like he might have his excuse.



President Barack Obama hinted Friday that he might not strike Syria if Congress rejects his authorization request.

“I’m not itching for military action… and if there are good ideas that are worth pursuing, then I’m going to be open to them,” he told one reporter who asked if he was seeking alternatives to a missile strike.

“Are we on a fast track to military action as soon as Congress renders its judgment one way or the other?” the reporter asked Obama, during his morning press conference in St. Petersburg, Russia.



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/06/obama-hints-his-may-abandon-syria-strike/#ixzz2e9c5qXDx

Anti Federalist wrote:

Very good point!

"Let me finish tonight with this. I believe that this debate over Syria is offering a roadmap to the Republican nomination for President next time. The candidate who wishes to be the nominee will be the one who positions himself as directly as possible against President Obama. Why? Well, you know. It's for the simple new definition of the Republican Party: it's the anti-Obama party. The more you hate Obama, the more you are deeply entrenched in the deepest bunker of the GOP. The further away from Obama, the further right you are -- and that is the safest place to be come campaign time. So watch this episode, the testing zone, this ground-zero for political posturing. Rand Paul voted against the Syrian resolution today. Marco Rubio, another member of the Foreign Relations Committee, followed him, also voting "Nay." Watch when we get to the Senate floor. It will be the same -- anyone who wants in in 2016 will vote to stay out of Syria. And that's Hardball for now. Thanks for being with us."

CHRIS MATTHEWS

Chris Matthews from MSNBC. You are one of the few that still pay attention to him.

Donzel wrote:: it's the anti-Obama party. The more you hate Obama, the more you are deeply entrenched in the deepest bunker of the GOP.

If they had half a brain they would put up Jeb Bush. His wife is Mexican, he speaks fluent Spanish and he has made considerable inroads with Hispanics. Jeb delivered a lot of minority votes to his brother, George, maybe something like 44% of Hispanics.

But there is no common sense left in the Republican party, as it has been hijacked by extremist goons. They'll probably put up someone like Rand Paul, who will do much worse than Romney did.

"If they had half a brain they would put up Jeb Bush. His wife is Mexican, he speaks fluent Spanish and he has made considerable inroads with Hispanics. Jeb delivered a lot of minority votes to his brother, George, maybe something like 44% of Hispanics."

That's not Racist?!

News Buzzard wrote:

But there is no common sense left in the Republican party, as it has been hijacked by extremist goons.

This forum is proof of that. The two goons here have very little common sense.  They don't even understand what they are posting.  It's just search for the negative and wait for a response that they can shoot down.
Kinda boring if you ask me.

fshnski wrote:"If they had half a brain they would put up Jeb Bush. His wife is Mexican, he speaks fluent Spanish and he has made considerable inroads with Hispanics. Jeb delivered a lot of minority votes to his brother, George, maybe something like 44% of Hispanics."

That's not Racist?!

See what I mean. He didn't even understand the post before he went negative.

What make you think this goon here doesn't understand your racist post.

The reason you want Jeb to run, NB, is he is a halfway liberal, just like his brother was.

News Buzzard wrote:

Donzel wrote:: it's the anti-Obama party. The more you hate Obama, the more you are deeply entrenched in the deepest bunker of the GOP.

If they had half a brain they would put up Jeb Bush. His wife is Mexican, he speaks fluent Spanish and he has made considerable inroads with Hispanics. Jeb delivered a lot of minority votes to his brother, George, maybe something like 44% of Hispanics.

But there is no common sense left in the Republican party, as it has been hijacked by extremist goons. They'll probably put up someone like Rand Paul, who will do much worse than Romney did.

Concern Troll is concerned.

Yeah, GOP "moderates" like Dole, and Bush Sr. the second time around and McCain and Romney do so well.

LOL, and the only reason there is even any talk of third Bush Presidency is because of W, who you all say "stole" the election in 2000. (The fact that you are probably right is not relevant here).

I don't know how Rand will do...in an honest election, you're probably right, he'd probably get crushed, for a very simple reason: most people hate freedom and don't want it.

They want to be spied on, they want to be snooped on, they want to pay over half their income to the state, they want to be abused by authority. I swear it's some sick, collective Stockholm Syndrome.

Or just simple human nature manifesting itself, because, let's face it, people throughout history mostly don't give a f*ck about freedom. Thomas Jefferson understood this when he wrote:

[a]nd accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

People want now, what people have always wanted: to be fed, entertained and exercise petty power and authority over their fellow man.

Anti Federalist wrote:

People want now, what people have always wanted: to be fed, entertained and exercise petty power and authority over their fellow man.

The "Bread and Circuses" that brought Rome to its annihilation by Vandals, Goths and the Huns.

This is thread is hysterical,

What is this thread about? Answer: Should we bomb Syria.

Not one person voted YES and that includes those who support Obama. Yet, those on the left are condemning those on the right for being anti-Obama. By the way Chris Matthews is against Bombing Syria.

The Obama Administration has made this issue political and his BLIND followers are drinking the Kool-Ade. Obama drew the line in the sand and put his foot in his mouth. We are talking about committing an act of war and the left (who should be against this) are ONLY talking about the political ramifications.

Question for the lefties...

George W Bush had overwhelming public support, approval of the congress, a 50 nation coalition, and a NATO resolution. Yet...WE were wrong to invade Iraq.

What does Obama have?

Not much support.

Anti Federalist wrote:

News Buzzard wrote:

Donzel wrote:: it's the anti-Obama party. The more you hate Obama, the more you are deeply entrenched in the deepest bunker of the GOP.

If they had half a brain they would put up Jeb Bush. His wife is Mexican, he speaks fluent Spanish and he has made considerable inroads with Hispanics. Jeb delivered a lot of minority votes to his brother, George, maybe something like 44% of Hispanics.

But there is no common sense left in the Republican party, as it has been hijacked by extremist goons. They'll probably put up someone like Rand Paul, who will do much worse than Romney did.

Concern Troll is concerned.

Yeah, GOP "moderates" like Dole, and Bush Sr. the second time around and McCain and Romney do so well.

LOL, and the only reason there is even any talk of third Bush Presidency is because of W, who you all say "stole" the election in 2000. (The fact that you are probably right is not relevant here).

I don't know how Rand will do...in an honest election, you're probably right, he'd probably get crushed, for a very simple reason: most people hate freedom and don't want it.

They want to be spied on, they want to be snooped on, they want to pay over half their income to the state, they want to be abused by authority. I swear it's some sick, collective Stockholm Syndrome.

Or just simple human nature manifesting itself, because, let's face it, people throughout history mostly don't give a f*ck about freedom. Thomas Jefferson understood this when he wrote:

[a]nd accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

People want now, what people have always wanted: to be fed, entertained and exercise petty power and authority over their fellow man.

I think Rand has a really great way of saying things. I hope he can convince people that he is the solution to this country's problems. That is if any elections are really fair any more. The media aside, I don't know if the people at the polls are so crooked, that we can't have a fair election. Two strikes against us?

News Hawk wrote:

Anti Federalist wrote:

People want now, what people have always wanted: to be fed, entertained and exercise petty power and authority over their fellow man.

The "Bread and Circuses" that brought Rome to its annihilation by Vandals, Goths and the Huns.

Exactly.

And what has built and ultimately destroyed every empire, ever.

WHL wrote:I think Rand has a really great way of saying things. I hope he can convince people that he is the solution to this country's problems.  That is if any elections are really fair any more.   The media aside, I don't know if the people at the polls are so crooked, that we can't have a fair election.  Two strikes against us?

I hope so, and he'll be the only political figure I'd support for president.

But yeah, between crooked elections and a populace in which people like us, who want less government and regulation and war, are a distinct minority, two strikes is right.

Let another real, or government manufactured "terror" event happened that kills ten or hundred times the number of 9/11, and you can shut off the lights and stick a fork in us, because we'll be done.

Donzel wrote:

fshnski wrote:"If they had half a brain they would put up Jeb Bush. His wife is Mexican, he speaks fluent Spanish and he has made considerable inroads with Hispanics. Jeb delivered a lot of minority votes to his brother, George, maybe something like 44% of Hispanics."

That's not Racist?!

See what I mean.  He didn't even understand the post before he went negative.

That's why he'll just be doing nothing but complaining about the Democratic President for the rest of his life. These people are in a closet up here and they refuse to accept the changing demographics of our country. Romney got 59% of the white vote and lost. Hello!