Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

frylock

(34,825 posts)

20. you're being far too reasonable

Reply to Xithras (Reply #16)

Thu Sep 19, 2013, 01:52 PM

Sep 2013

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

34 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Assad To Destroy Chemical Weapons 'In A Year' [View all] dipsydoodle Sep 2013 OP

Every day that Assad can hold on to power Turbineguy Sep 2013 #1

he does have a point Niceguy1 Sep 2013 #2

Not intended to work like that. dipsydoodle Sep 2013 #3

they probably don't have the technology Niceguy1 Sep 2013 #8

Let the Saudis fund it, they were willing to fund the bombing. morningfog Sep 2013 #4

Even better - Russia and Qatar. Big weapons suppliers, small players in humanitarian aid. pampango Sep 2013 #10

Just a small difference. arewenotdemo Sep 2013 #18

Agreed. Although whether either is moral is another question. n/t pampango Sep 2013 #19

To all the people celebrating that diplomatic solution... jessie04 Sep 2013 #5

Look, a crystal ball! Celefin Sep 2013 #7

Laugh all you want. jessie04 Sep 2013 #23

Not really Celefin Sep 2013 #24

And thank you. jessie04 Sep 2013 #27

The goal of the administration was never a diplomatic solution, it was a PR solution. hughee99 Sep 2013 #32

Compared to a bombing campaign that's probably a bargain Celefin Sep 2013 #6

The USA has a ban on selling weapons to Syria/Iran/NK , let the F-ing salesmen and investors pay Sunlei Sep 2013 #9

"The country that sold the guns gets to clean up the mess" JoeyT Sep 2013 #11

the helicoptors Assad flies, the huge rocket launchers came from someone. Sunlei Sep 2013 #12

So you think the US should pay for everyone we ever armed? JoeyT Sep 2013 #14

could start with today without having to pay for all 300 years of injustices first. Sunlei Sep 2013 #15

Oh right. I forgot that we're special. JoeyT Sep 2013 #17

"Our country has a mandate, Americans are banned from selling to those countries" Nihil Sep 2013 #28

The USA has been training people there for decades. We do have a mandate. Sunlei Sep 2013 #29

Straight out of the North Korean playbook. Daniel537 Sep 2013 #13

The United States began destroying its chemical weapons in 1990. We're still not finished. Xithras Sep 2013 #16

you're being far too reasonable frylock Sep 2013 #20

^^THIS^^ -nt- Celefin Sep 2013 #25

Agreed. My first thought was disbelief, then I realized it's not an easy thing to do the right way stevenleser Sep 2013 #30

Ok sounds good. obxhead Sep 2013 #21

There is a precedent Nunn/Lugar and then Lugar/Obama funded the US karynnj Sep 2013 #22

Who sold them JustAnotherGen Sep 2013 #26

Short answer? No one. The precursor chemicals can be used for a variety of non-weapon things. stevenleser Sep 2013 #31

Thanks JustAnotherGen Sep 2013 #34

It has taken the U.S.and Russia over a decade daleo Sep 2013 #33