General Discussion

last1standing

(11,709 posts) Sun Sep 8, 2013, 06:02 PM Sep 2013

So it all comes down to the fact that Obama 'reckons' Assad did it. [View all]

It turns out the "irrefutable proof" now means "common sense" and this is the argument Obama is using in yet another attempt to gain support for killing men, women, (and yes) children in Syria.

Let's just be clear, you can use common sense to know that a cat with milk on her nose has been into your cereal bowl. You can use common sense to know that your teen-ager who smells of booze has been drinking. You CANNOT use common sense as an excuse to murder people. It doesn't work that way.

Using common sense as an reason to kill is called vigilante justice. It is not rule of law, it is rule without law and that is what Obama is now proposing.

Will we be a nation that requires facts and evidence before going to war or will we just reckon our adversaries deserved it anyway?

112 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So it all comes down to the fact that Obama 'reckons' Assad did it. [View all] last1standing Sep 2013 OP

who is trying to murder people? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #1

Did you not read the part about "proximity to civilians?" last1standing Sep 2013 #9

So nothing can ever happen if there is a chance that someone dies? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #20

And you can't argue reason with the blood-thirsty. last1standing Sep 2013 #23

Who says I am blood thirsty? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #24

Who says I'm a pacifist? last1standing Sep 2013 #37

apparently so..."if even one person dies" it is not a worthwhile effort VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #38

Since you're quoting something I didn't write, I'll assume you have no real argument. last1standing Sep 2013 #74

Okay then I'll play along with your game... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #90

That's the difference between us. I don't see this as a game. last1standing Sep 2013 #92

Oh YES you do... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #93

Again, you don't have an argument so you make up shit to argue with. last1standing Sep 2013 #96

Just responding to your little rants about "what I am doing"... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #98

LOL! Did you really type that out thinking no one could glance up to see the rest of this thread? last1standing Sep 2013 #99

yeah...right.... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #100

And now you're just parroting what I said. last1standing Sep 2013 #101

If I am not making sense to you....then I must be hurting your widdle feelings... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #102

Yeah, you really should have taken the time I suggested. Copying my post again is sad. last1standing Sep 2013 #103

or something.....you keep trying ya hear? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #104

How would you feel if you knew 500 would die in US strikes? morningfog Sep 2013 #27

In an effort to eliminate Sarin gas....so it cannot fall into the wrong hands? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #28

You may have "fixed" it, but you certainly didn't answer it. cherokeeprogressive Sep 2013 #31

Just because you don't like the answer you got...doesn't mean it wasnt answered. VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #40

I am stating a FACT right here and now that you DID NOT answer the question you claimed to "fix". cherokeeprogressive Sep 2013 #45

This is his modus operandi. DisgustipatedinCA Sep 2013 #91

You didn't give an answer. morningfog Sep 2013 #46

Okay. And the answer? morningfog Sep 2013 #34

How many will you allow to die from Sarin gas before you do something about it... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #41

Dodge number two. morningfog Sep 2013 #44

How would you feel if you knew that 500 would die in US strikes in an effort to eliminate Sarin gas? morningfog Sep 2013 #60

How would you feel if you knew that 500 would die in US strikes in an effort to eliminate Sarin gas? morningfog Sep 2013 #70

Unfortunately appealing to logic and truedelphi Sep 2013 #105

He'll never answer. Iggo Sep 2013 #42

He is a she...and I answered...How many? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #43

How many? Iggo Sep 2013 #49

How many would have to die of Sarin for you to react? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #51

How many children killed in the name of RIDDING the world of sarin will it take before YOU react? sibelian Sep 2013 #95

You are not thinking this thing through... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #97

I counted, you answered exactly (pulls out calculator) ... 0 times! Dragonfli Sep 2013 #82

Lol...see what I mean? Iggo Sep 2013 #54

It's kind of hilarious. Almost like talking to a machine that spits morningfog Sep 2013 #64

Yup. Iggo Sep 2013 #67

It is funny at first, then you grow tired after about twenty posts of nonsense Dragonfli Sep 2013 #71

Why is it the U.S. job to unilaterally bomb Syria? JackRiddler Sep 2013 #89

That definition of murder is not accepted treestar Sep 2013 #30

I would have said yes, but according to you the definition does not fit... Dragonfli Sep 2013 #73

Assad is guilty of murder treestar Sep 2013 #80

willfully causing the death of hundreds if not thousands of civilians? errr not really. /nt Dragonfli Sep 2013 #83

Yes, Assad is a murderer. Does that excuse Obama becoming one as well? last1standing Sep 2013 #79

No it is you saying that murderers should get away with it treestar Sep 2013 #81

Why not proactively cause the deaths of thousands more! That'll help. That'll teach em what for! Dragonfli Sep 2013 #84

Since I never said that, you must not have a real argument. last1standing Sep 2013 #85

Dude, that's a pipe dream. We're going in with Cruise missiles and bombs. morningfog Sep 2013 #26

Even Popular Mechanics has a great article on it... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #47

Do you read what you post? morningfog Sep 2013 #52

Yes I do....do you? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #53

His chemical weapons are most likely now stored in close proximity to civilian population centers. cherokeeprogressive Sep 2013 #56

thats you guessing.... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #58

Not when it is stored or contained. You should read some more popular mechanics articles. morningfog Sep 2013 #61

that would be stupid...like there would never be a spill and deaths bringing international attention VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #65

The chemicals aren't released until they are detonated. morningfog Sep 2013 #66

they are still chemicals! Seriously dangerous chemicals VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #69

This has nothing to do with sophistication. morningfog Sep 2013 #57

and remember when I mentioned foam VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #55

Have you heard that the plan is to use Cruise missiles? morningfog Sep 2013 #59

You have no idea what is planned do you? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #62

Patents don't mean (1) that they work, (2) that they would work in Syria, (3) that morningfog Sep 2013 #63

And check this article about the technology back in 1999! VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #68

I noticed you keep on with the miracle bomb link Savannahmann Sep 2013 #35

It's no miracle...its technology... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #50

It is still theoretical. Savannahmann Sep 2013 #72

It's the trial balloon for "there's no there there." David__77 Sep 2013 #2

His Magic 8 Ball said "all signs point to yes" NightWatcher Sep 2013 #3

what? gristy Sep 2013 #4

Here you go. woo me with science Sep 2013 #5

yikes gristy Sep 2013 #6

It's impossible to keep up with woo me with science Sep 2013 #22

Thanks woo. last1standing Sep 2013 #8

My pleasure. woo me with science Sep 2013 #21

Appalling n/t Catherina Sep 2013 #75

LOL! reformist2 Sep 2013 #13

LOL. That was awesome. nt LaydeeBug Sep 2013 #14

Is this what they mean by "Dead Reckoning?" Jackpine Radical Sep 2013 #10

Maybe he should have called Colin..... DeSwiss Sep 2013 #11

I remember threads on DU supporting IWR after Powell addressed the UN. last1standing Sep 2013 #12

I was never one of them. DeSwiss Sep 2013 #15

That was pointed out at the time. last1standing Sep 2013 #16

So wait, it seems you are saying treestar Sep 2013 #32

As does France, Germany and Britain, and probably the Un when their report comes out bhikkhu Sep 2013 #17

Britain is going to attack Syria? last1standing Sep 2013 #18

No, but they concluded that Assad was responsible for the chemical attacks bhikkhu Sep 2013 #19

Their parliament concluded they wouldn't support Britain going to war daleo Sep 2013 #25

Then we can move on from "Assad did it" to what we should do in response bhikkhu Sep 2013 #48

No we can't. Just because Cameron decided Assad did it doesn't make it fact. last1standing Sep 2013 #77

So how to decide? treestar Sep 2013 #29

"reckons" ??? Beverly Hillbilly talk? L0oniX Sep 2013 #33

reckin? CountAllVotes Sep 2013 #36

Nawt an nawt an double nawt bomb em. L0oniX Sep 2013 #39

even wirth absolute proof, the US has NO RIGHT to attack Syria. bowens43 Sep 2013 #76

Agreed, but not having facts makes it even worse. last1standing Sep 2013 #78

Thank you. A point that many people are missing LibAsHell Sep 2013 #94

Where/when did he say "common sense"? n/t cui bono Sep 2013 #86

Here. last1standing Sep 2013 #87

Thanks. n/t cui bono Sep 2013 #109

Herer's an a rticle that refers to the "common sense" aspect of the matter: truedelphi Sep 2013 #106

Thanks. n/t cui bono Sep 2013 #108

"Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don’t know about that decision." Common Sense Party Sep 2013 #88

This sounds so Nxonian - truedelphi Sep 2013 #112

PNAC Cronus Protagonist Sep 2013 #107

Assad did it. jpak Sep 2013 #110

Ya reckon? last1standing Sep 2013 #111