Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ...
4
12
13
14
15
16
LastLast
  1. #261
    Quote Originally Posted by Noobadin View Post
    Meh, the United States still shouldn't get involved in it. It's not our war to begin with, and it's not like we've never turned a blind eye to the use of chemical weapons before. Let the UN or some other nation go play world police and fix this.
    Why shouldn't the US help out?

  2. #262
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,210
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    War sucks, but it is sometimes necessary. If there was a dire need for war, then that need would be clear and present and I suspect most people would support the need to fight. This is not a dire need for war, what is going on is neither clear nor present.
    Whether or not it's necessary is a different issue, I feel. Perhaps I should have said that it's something we probably can't afford.

  3. #263
    The Insane smrund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    15,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Grokan View Post
    Whether or not it's necessary is a different issue, I feel. Perhaps I should have said that it's something we probably can't afford.
    Not at the time, certainly not. Wars of attrition where the whole country goes into battle-mode can be afforded simply because of how that works. These "police actions" are stupid expensive otherwise.
    Quote Originally Posted by Masark View Post
    People in cars cause accidents. Accidents in cars cause people.
    Sometimes life gives you lemons, other times life gives you boobies. Life is always better with more boobies.
    Blizzard removed my subscription from WoD's features, it'll be added sometime later.
    And thus I give you: MALE contraception!

  4. #264
    Banned TheGravemind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    CAIRO STATION UNSCDF-ODAI42
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by Raybourne View Post
    Why shouldn't the US help out?
    We should help out and we will. Just watch.

  5. #265
    Quote Originally Posted by Raybourne View Post
    Why shouldn't the US help out?
    It costs substantial amounts of money to militarily intervene. At a time when we're sufficiently strapped for cash that we're arguing about whether poor Americans should receive less assistance with food subsidies, I'm disinclined to spend money empowering an Islamist government in a country of very little geopolitical relevance.

  6. #266
    Banned TheGravemind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    CAIRO STATION UNSCDF-ODAI42
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    It costs substantial amounts of money to militarily intervene. At a time when we're sufficiently strapped for cash that we're arguing about whether poor Americans should receive less assistance with food subsidies, I'm disinclined to spend money empowering an Islamist government in a country of very little geopolitical relevance.
    You view the situation with a highly biased lens rather than an objective one. We would not be empowering an Islamist government, and I refuse to accept the notion that you can put a price tag on a life (especially when it wouldn't cost that much to save countless lives.)

  7. #267
    The Insane smrund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    15,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Psyopz View Post
    We should help out and we will. Just watch.
    Do we even know who we're helping? Do we know what their goals are? Their supporters? Their reasons? Or are they just "those guys who don't like that guy we don't like?" That's not real good grounds to start a war on.
    Quote Originally Posted by Masark View Post
    People in cars cause accidents. Accidents in cars cause people.
    Sometimes life gives you lemons, other times life gives you boobies. Life is always better with more boobies.
    Blizzard removed my subscription from WoD's features, it'll be added sometime later.
    And thus I give you: MALE contraception!

  8. #268
    Quote Originally Posted by Psyopz View Post
    You view the situation with a highly biased lens rather than an objective one.
    Can you point out how?

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyopz View Post
    We would not be empowering an Islamist government
    I don't think you're well informed about the Syrian rebels.

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyopz View Post
    I refuse to accept the notion that you can put a price tag on a life
    Then it's completely impossible for you to evaluate policy decisions. You might not like that there's a price on life, but without one, objective analysis is impossible.

  9. #269
    As an American, I'm tired of being shit on while we solve everyone's issues. I vote we pull out and let other countries deal with it, I'm not worried about ANY other 1st world country attacking us. Let other people deal with it. I'm tired of us fighting useless war.

  10. #270
    Scarab Lord Noobadin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    4,041
    Quote Originally Posted by Raybourne View Post
    Why shouldn't the US help out?
    Because helping the Syrian rebels out entails going to war with another nation, which costs lots money and more importantly lives(sometimes). If we're going to spend god knows how many millions/billions helping people out, why not spend that money on Americans that need help instead. I really don't see what the US has to gain by putting Islamic extremist in power in Syria.

    Turkey seems so gung-ho on fixing Syria's problem's, why not just let them ride in there and save the day.

  11. #271
    The Lightbringer shise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Spaniard in Copenhagen
    Posts
    3,952
    Don't believe this crap, really.

    The truth going on there is really far from the crap they are telling us on tv every day.

  12. #272
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    It costs substantial amounts of money to militarily intervene. At a time when we're sufficiently strapped for cash that we're arguing about whether poor Americans should receive less assistance with food subsidies, I'm disinclined to spend money empowering an Islamist government in a country of very little geopolitical relevance.
    While I am completely against WMD being used, and personally think the Syria dictator needs to be ousted, I am inclined to agree with you.

    Right now we have enough problems of our own, not including the world holding their hand out to us for help. I've always noticed the trend of helping other countries, and celebrities manning call centers to aid to needy countries, but you don't see too many of them crying for our own citizens. Hell, I saw more celebrity support for disasters in foreign countries over our own.

    Gotta get our priorities straight.

    On top of that, not a fan of throwing one government out, just to let another take over that is probably going to lead it into another mess that is similar to what it is now.
    Quote Originally Posted by Standsinfire View Post
    Me: whyumad* fixed. Seriously though, it's only because they rapin' eveerbody in here and I don't want you to be snatched out yo' windows.
    Quote Originally Posted by noepeen View Post
    If that were my dog, I'd Hulk Smash the fuck out of that raccoon.
    Or I'd shit my pants.

  13. #273
    Quote Originally Posted by Psyopz View Post
    We should help out and we will. Just watch.
    to what purpose? neither assad nor the rebels want us involved. if we get involved we will be once again vilified, still have a country hostile to us, and it would cost us billions of dollars and most likely another few thousand american lives. if we are going to put our soldiers in harm's way it shouldnt be on behalf of a group that is just as happy to shoot us as the people we go to stop

  14. #274
    The US and Israel will do a joint mission in securing those weapon sites so they can't be used. We won't let them use those chemical weapons, rightly so.

  15. #275
    Banned TheGravemind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    CAIRO STATION UNSCDF-ODAI42
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by smelltheglove View Post
    to what purpose? neither assad nor the rebels want us involved. if we get involved we will be once again vilified, still have a country hostile to us, and it would cost us billions of dollars and most likely another few thousand american lives. if we are going to put our soldiers in harm's way it shouldnt be on behalf of a group that is just as happy to shoot us as the people we go to stop
    Are you serious right now? The Rebels are practically begging us to lend a helping hand.

  16. #276
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    Pretty serious escalation. If Assad uses these weapons, all bets are off. I'd personally be fine with a strong unilateral response.
    Not much appetite for playing cowboys in the Middle East these days.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

  17. #277
    Quote Originally Posted by Psyopz View Post
    You view the situation with a highly biased lens rather than an objective one. We would not be empowering an Islamist government, and I refuse to accept the notion that you can put a price tag on a life (especially when it wouldn't cost that much to save countless lives.)
    Money is objective, the value of life is not.

    Bergtau's Law: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability that somebody will mention Godwin's Law approaches 1.
    Hitler wasn't all bad, I mean, he DID kill Hitler.
    An accident is something that you did not mean to do at all. A mistake is something that you regret doing.

  18. #278
    These news are made not because Syria has chemical weapons. It is to gauge the americans' reception and to see if there is any chance of convincing the society.

    If Assad really had WMDs and the intention of using them, he would do it before the election, not now. The news is fabricated with a purpose in mind.

  19. #279
    The Lightbringer Deadvolcanoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    3,599
    Quote Originally Posted by kharyll View Post
    These news are made not because Syria has chemical weapons. It is to gauge the americans' reception and to see if there is any chance of convincing the society.

    If Assad really had WMDs and the intention of using them, he would do it before the election, not now. The news is fabricated with a purpose in mind.
    This might be the least convincing and most laughable of all tin-foil theories on this subject, and that's saying something.
    It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.

  20. #280
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,210
    Quote Originally Posted by kharyll View Post
    These news are made not because Syria has chemical weapons. It is to gauge the americans' reception and to see if there is any chance of convincing the society.

    If Assad really had WMDs and the intention of using them, he would do it before the election, not now. The news is fabricated with a purpose in mind.
    Going to have to slap an E.C.R.E.E. on this.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •