General Discussion

progressoid

(53,179 posts)

129. Well, let's see...

Reply to treestar (Reply #74)

Wed Sep 4, 2013, 12:04 PM

Sep 2013

what are our options?

Hmmm....

1. Bombing
2.

That's it. Bombing. Just bomb the fuckers.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

171 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I didn't set a red line, the world did. - Obama in Sweden just now [View all] WilliamPitt Sep 2013 OP

Um... tridim Sep 2013 #1

Oh yeah, I see where it says that the consequence of using chemical weapons is progressoid Sep 2013 #2

What should they be? treestar Sep 2013 #74

Well, let's see... progressoid Sep 2013 #129

But what are some other ideas? treestar Sep 2013 #158

I can't think of any. progressoid Sep 2013 #161

LOL ananda Sep 2013 #162

Indeed. joshcryer Sep 2013 #15

Putin 'does not rule out' approving Syria strike with evidence Assad used poison gas Little Star Sep 2013 #98

He already said Syria didn't do it. joshcryer Sep 2013 #101

. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #21

Okay, I'll put you down as not supporting the Chemical Weapons Convention. tridim Sep 2013 #24

LOL Capt. Obvious Sep 2013 #34

Where was that part? atreides1 Sep 2013 #37

I haven't supported any war my entire life and I don't support war in Syria. tridim Sep 2013 #42

"The President doesn't support war in Syria either." woo me with science Sep 2013 #54

The President does NOT support war in Syria. tridim Sep 2013 #56

Of course he doesn't consider it war. woo me with science Sep 2013 #59

It's not war is a (Democratic) President does it n2doc Sep 2013 #70

It's not a war, if it's not a war. tridim Sep 2013 #108

Oh Jesus, just stop with the BS already. It's already a fucking war. Dawgs Sep 2013 #78

Boots on the ground already huh. tridim Sep 2013 #109

My avatar is a person, and he's wrong. Dawgs Sep 2013 #155

Crazy isn't it? SammyWinstonJack Sep 2013 #118

Yep. Dawgs Sep 2013 #156

2%. 98% of the world is against chemical weapons. joshcryer Sep 2013 #38

Yes, but considering the Syrian people don't want to be gassed by Assad... tridim Sep 2013 #48

I, naturally, require UN action. joshcryer Sep 2013 #51

False dichotomy Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #39

I don't support war in Syria, I am beating no war drums. tridim Sep 2013 #50

No one can make him attack Syria except him. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #65

Until the Preseident says he supports war, then you'll be all for it LondonReign2 Sep 2013 #159

I couldn't help but notice you skipped all of Nuclear Unicorn's points, and just went straight to Marr Sep 2013 #44

Point 1 is irrelevant. joshcryer Sep 2013 #53

Point 1 is relevant Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #67

The 4th Geneva Convention and Protocol I. joshcryer Sep 2013 #69

Another goof who has to put words into people's mouths to cover their failings. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #76

Only under the UNSC. joshcryer Sep 2013 #82

Unilateral action isn't legal either, so it's not really about international law. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #95

No shit. joshcryer Sep 2013 #99

At least five nations haven't banned them. AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #145

Who do you prefer start bombing us for indiscriminate attacks on civilians? AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #141

I'll put you down as a practitioner of putting words cali Sep 2013 #62

Yeah? Why not read the thread? joshcryer Sep 2013 #85

I read the thread, putting words into the mouths of others and posting sparkly emoticons Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #96

tridim is literally responding to said poster. joshcryer Sep 2013 #103

I can read, josh. tridim said the other posted does not support the Chem Weapons Convention Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #116

Read post 67, it supports my allegation. joshcryer Sep 2013 #119

No it does not. You are characterizing when the actual words are there to read. Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #127

Anyone can read the words. I will quote them here: joshcryer Sep 2013 #130

So, you're going to pretend that AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #139

What part of SYRIA IS NOT A MEMBER is confusing to you? AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #138

Is it okay for Syria to gas their people because they're not a member? tridim Sep 2013 #148

Intentionally gassing civilians? AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #149

Yes, Assad is intentionally targeting and killing innocent civilians with gas weapons. nt tridim Sep 2013 #153

That allegation is not yet proven. AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #154

Where is the authorization for a country to enforce the Convention without the UN? morningfog Sep 2013 #140

+1 treestar Sep 2013 #73

I just fucking lost it on that bigtree Sep 2013 #3

Un-fucking-real Baclava Sep 2013 #4

Oy! nt City Lights Sep 2013 #9

So the US isn't part of the international community? SammyWinstonJack Sep 2013 #126

Mr. President if that is the case... Harmony Blue Sep 2013 #5

Because the majority of the world is comfortable with dictators murdering their own people el_bryanto Sep 2013 #7

I don't agree Harmony Blue Sep 2013 #11

Where have they unified? Recently? Afghanistan? nt el_bryanto Sep 2013 #33

The first Gulf War is one example Harmony Blue Sep 2013 #66

Russia consistently vetos any UN resolutions on Syria. joshcryer Sep 2013 #14

The general assembly is not the security council Harmony Blue Sep 2013 #25

Russia is the only one doing anything. joshcryer Sep 2013 #31

Russia isn't the only country opposing Harmony Blue Sep 2013 #40

China is actually calling for UN support. joshcryer Sep 2013 #45

China is playing their hand Harmony Blue Sep 2013 #106

China is a patsy for Russia. joshcryer Sep 2013 #110

Sorry not buying it Harmony Blue Sep 2013 #115

They've only vetoed 8 times. joshcryer Sep 2013 #120

The Chinese have similar interests Harmony Blue Sep 2013 #132

The UN Security Council makes it hard to wage war legally. morningfog Sep 2013 #143

Good fucking god. woo me with science Sep 2013 #6

Spare us, please. joshcryer Sep 2013 #18

Spare you what? woo me with science Sep 2013 #35

I did not say the US should "unilaterally bomb another country." joshcryer Sep 2013 #46

"if Obama continues to paint the international community as responsible for what happens in Syria, Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #68

The region of concern here isn't known for its lurid attire. joshcryer Sep 2013 #71

. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #87

. joshcryer Sep 2013 #93

I did, goof. You just deliebrately refuse to acknowledge it. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #113

The international community "started it" when they signed the CWC. joshcryer Sep 2013 #117

The international community is watching a knife fight between Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #121

Now we wait. joshcryer Sep 2013 #124

I see today's talking point is out Capt. Obvious Sep 2013 #36

Depleeeeeeted uranium... whistle whistle... sibelian Sep 2013 #144

WTF! City Lights Sep 2013 #8

Incredible... NuclearDem Sep 2013 #10

98% of the world has banned chemical weapons. joshcryer Sep 2013 #12

So we go along with most of the world Go Vols Sep 2013 #75

DU is legal under the Convention on Conventional Weapons. joshcryer Sep 2013 #80

161 Countries have signed the Mine Ban Treaty, the US is one of 36 to refuse Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #105

And? joshcryer Sep 2013 #107

I see you arguing that we stand with the world on weapons issues. Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #123

I still don't see the disagreement. joshcryer Sep 2013 #128

I shall clarify the situation for you. sibelian Sep 2013 #147

This should give his detractors something to whiney about for a bit snooper2 Sep 2013 #13

Yep, they're already starting it. joshcryer Sep 2013 #16

I really think it is due to the online bitching syndrome snooper2 Sep 2013 #23

It's mind boggling. joshcryer Sep 2013 #29

Part of ODS is not allowing the President to have a say treestar Sep 2013 #79

98% of the world is not against chemical weapons. former9thward Sep 2013 #86

Only 5 states are not party to the Chemical Weapons Convention. joshcryer Sep 2013 #90

Regardless of who signed what 98% of the world does not favor military action in Syria. former9thward Sep 2013 #137

"His" detractors. woo me with science Sep 2013 #27

This thread isn't about something HE said? snooper2 Sep 2013 #32

No war for ego! Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #47

That's the worst thing Obama has ever said!!!! JoePhilly Sep 2013 #17

lolz Turborama Sep 2013 #22

Isn't it time for recess? GeorgeGist Sep 2013 #58

I think the Combustible Hair Club needs a nap. JoePhilly Sep 2013 #60

How strange is that. Um... Autumn Sep 2013 #19

Let's go to the video pintobean Sep 2013 #20

We are the world. Autumn Sep 2013 #26

Look at that Harmony Blue Sep 2013 #28

Yep, totally off the cuff remark. joshcryer Sep 2013 #30

He obviously never loved Obama. nt woo me with science Sep 2013 #41

He's right, NEVER AGAIN! A lot of people around the world, meant it when they said, "never again!" Sunlei Sep 2013 #43

Never again WHAT? MNBrewer Sep 2013 #49

are you ignorant of world history or don't care about pesticide use on humans? Sunlei Sep 2013 #81

No, I'm not ignorant of history MNBrewer Sep 2013 #83

it is not rhetoric, to be totally against the use of pesticides against humans. Sunlei Sep 2013 #94

True fact: Use of tear gas in war is a war crime MNBrewer Sep 2013 #97

Godwin is here. GeorgeGist Sep 2013 #61

Wow. polly7 Sep 2013 #52

Oh man, he's losing the plot LittleBlue Sep 2013 #55

Note to the President: GeorgeGist Sep 2013 #57

And we're not at check or mate maxsolomon Sep 2013 #63

Apparently, McCain didn't get that memo. merrily Sep 2013 #146

seems he kinda painted himself into a corner on this issue... KG Sep 2013 #64

...again. Iggo Sep 2013 #88

Himself? Or us? merrily Sep 2013 #150

So when will the world 'strike' the US for using white phosphorous in Amonester Sep 2013 #72

+1 Little Star Sep 2013 #104

+1 leftstreet Sep 2013 #114

Apparently we are not too be held accountable by the international community SammyWinstonJack Sep 2013 #135

Oh pshaw. progressoid Sep 2013 #166

I guess the Abu Graib torture is okey dokey 2. Amonester Sep 2013 #169

Which Nobel is he adding to his collection? Capt. Obvious Sep 2013 #77

Good Lord! Such determination. Imagine the insane rhetoric when he gets to Iran n/t Catherina Sep 2013 #84

People who talk out of both sides of their mouth always seem so impressed with themselves. Romulox Sep 2013 #89

Then let the f**king world take care of the problem. Not the USA. ugh Little Star Sep 2013 #91

Obama reiterated an established international law bhikkhu Sep 2013 #92

What law? Little Star Sep 2013 #102

Fourth Geneva Convention and Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions. joshcryer Sep 2013 #112

Lets get one thing straight.... Little Star Sep 2013 #122

Your first statement doesn't match your second statement. joshcryer Sep 2013 #125

Oh FFS. I'm done with talking to you. Keep on drinking all the kool aide you want... Little Star Sep 2013 #131

Smart move. Dawgs Sep 2013 #157

. Little Star Sep 2013 #160

Those are the ones. Ratified in 1925, then expanded in the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention bhikkhu Sep 2013 #167

Well, it's interesting ProSense Sep 2013 #111

Um yea, he is RIGHT and I made this same point a week or 2 ago. phleshdef Sep 2013 #100

so bombing as a first option solves all the world's problems now? Baclava Sep 2013 #134

+1 nt Javaman Sep 2013 #164

Kerry yesterday Lifelong Dem Sep 2013 #133

Oh, he's a comedian now. ocpagu Sep 2013 #136

That was pretty impressive spin. polichick Sep 2013 #142

Um, yeah, Will. It's called the Geneva Convention. I think you are pretty cognizant of msanthrope Sep 2013 #151

Doesn't even have the courage of his convictions. Instead of unambiguously claiming his statement, MotherPetrie Sep 2013 #152

oh that obama and his vulcan mind tricks.. frylock Sep 2013 #163

If the world set a red line, Blue_In_AK Sep 2013 #165

Here it is from his lips about a year ago whoiswithme Sep 2013 #168

I thought the world set red lines against clusterbombs and depleted uranium too n/t eridani Sep 2013 #170

+1 woo me with science Sep 2013 #171