Posted on 08/29/2013 4:55:18 PM PDT by lbryce
British Prime Minister David Cameron lost a preliminary vote on Syria, an early sign of the pushback Western governments may face as they prepare to launch an attack.
Thursday evening's vote was nonbinding, but in practice the rejection of military strikes means Mr. Cameron's hands are tied. In a terse statement to Parliament, Mr. Cameron said it was clear to him that the British people did not want to see military action.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
The Iraqi invasion should give all those who advocate military pause for another misadventure in the Middle East, with trillions of dollars expended, untold number of our military heroes killed, wounded, maimed for life,
What practical, tangible aspect have we gained, did we gain, with the War in Iraq? I would say, you'd be hard-pressed to find a single neocon who wouldn't want to move the clock back.
What Assad did was immoral, contemptible, a thousand people or more having suffered a grisly death.
Wars should not be fought only on the basis of the moral issues involved in any decision to end the regime of Assad. War declared must include the aspect of genuine threat, the involvement military action against us, Pearl Harbor, 9/11.
Assad is a very bad man, has done terrible things, but we must not be knee-jerk, to invade a country where our needs and interests are not threatened. Morality as the overwhelming basis for military action is a very poor reason to to war.
Good. This needs to be thought through carefully.
However you have found a neocon here who wouldn't want to move the clock back on Iraq.
9/12/01's New York Times reported Saddam Hussein announcing his support for the 9/11 attacks that had just taken place on our country.
He got taken out and I believe that was a gain.
Agreed the idea that someone should be ‘punished’ by us in idiotic. We are being duped again. This time people realize it. When does the mission creep, constitution and purple fingers start? Been there, done that.
That’s gonna leave the Community Warganizer© in a dicey spot.
Thank God someone on this planet has some brains. God bless the brits!!
There is NO reason for America to spill any blood or waste money in that sh!thole corner of the world. Those muzzie savages have been killing each other for centuries and NOTHING we could do will change that.
I pray that someone has the balls to tell the muzzie in the white hut to back off!!!
Congrats, Parliament! Y’all have more brains than the entire US executive branch.
‘Course that IS a pretty low bar.
The rate of violence in Iraq has hit 2008 levels.
The Iraq war was a waste.
He watched the mania of the UN and the US Foreign Policy Community for the decolonization of Africa and other places, and called it a fools' errand. He said that all that decolonization would accomplish would be to create a playground for the CIA and KGB. He stated that there are some people who are not ready for democracy, and who would never be ready for democracy due to cultural and religious reasons. The best that could be hoped for was a benevolent dictator, preferably one loyal to the US, not the Soviets.
The Mainstream Media excoriated him for "illiberal thinking", but he called it right.
Quite frankly Assad was doing some decent things to modernize the country against the backdrop of Islamic extremism. He is no Saddam, and is rather mild compared to some of the insanity of that region.
Well Done!
.............................
viva Bashar!
A look at IQ rates for some of those places confirms the same. They can't actually grasp the concept of democracy and individual liberty. Moslems need to be RULED.
From where I sit he might have got it right.
(Credit to Travis McGee from his books.)
It was a gain but as I said the requirements for war never
be based on only issues of morality. There should be a military threat or actual attack. The capturing of Saddam was not a matter of military threat, intervention as the cause, it was a matter of morality, he was captured as criminal, while it was a gain, it did not fulfill the conditions for going to war if merely for moral reasons,
Like my dad has said “Don’t turn your back to them”
He spent a couple of years working in Egypt and then Lebanon—in the Bekaa Valley. He knows.
I’m no neo-con. Not even in the same neighborhood. But I would agree that the world is a better place today because saddam hussein is no longer in it.
Saddam was merely par for the course in that part of the world.
That there’s some mighty powerful sarcasm hidden behind just three little words. What is our dam concern to intervene? He’s killed people. So have a multitude of countries been doing the exact same thing. So why are we sitting on our butts and taking in the sun?? Why aren’t we going cross the globe to topple leaders who’ve killed their own people?
Well Done!
.............................
viva tin pot dictators!
Motivated more on our original fight against him in 1991, and for what? Taking out a country that was illegally side-drilling into Iraqi Oil Fields....and protecting our Saudi Masters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.