Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Progress 2016 | Customer Service | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

War with Syria?

August 30, 2013

Terming use of chemical weapons in the Syrian civil war a “red line” that, if crossed, would result in decisive U.S. action was a mistake on President Barack Obama’s part....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Sep-05-13 4:23 PM

It's Thursday afternoon at the movies.

Showing: Silence of the Lambs

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-04-13 9:38 AM

I'm reminded of another situation where the US and Russia took sides in another country's war...

OOPS - I was thinking of the past. Oh well, hope nobody noticed.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-02-13 8:46 PM

It doesn't matter if the gas was used or not. But, you are right. Why should we accept the intelligence? The dems have said for years that there were no WMD as Bush had said. But, the dems here have not really come out in support of an attack. In fact they have been exceptionally quiet except for bashing the other posters.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-02-13 4:07 PM

Even if Obama does send missiles to Syria, he will never get the blame. It will somehow fall back to someone else. It will be bad intell and this time the media will listen. Unlike the Iraq war. He has to make good on his campaign statement. He has followed very few of his campaign promises, wish he would ignore this one too.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-02-13 12:13 PM

Just watch a video of Glen Beck talking about who we are backing in Syria. Absolutely shocking. It shows the people US is sending money to killing a soldier, cutting him open and eating his liver and heart. Stay out of Syria, let them sort themselves out.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-02-13 10:48 AM

You have to understand that this is very serious business right now and the air force base is only 12 miles north and the rest of the world is not going along with the program.

Not only does the US have a military, but it is not a huge jump of logic to know that the other side has weapons too and some are chemical and a direct attack on the US mainland might happen again and 9112013 redux is 10 days from now, and it seems as though the war is on, set to go, so it is a very scary situation, from my vantage.

No fighting in the war room.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-02-13 10:17 AM

Veratis, why would anyone continue to repeat posts without refuting them, --unless one does agree with them? Where are the comments supporting Obama?

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-02-13 10:10 AM

Obuma is Wall Street's favorite president so far. What other president could do a better job of borrowing 12 trillion dollars and pay interest to Wall Street banksters to the tune of 400 billion dollars each year and the taxpayer is the bagholder, not Odumba?

The Obamabots will continue with their brownshirt agenda and support O until the very bitter end.

They haven't a clue, they are useful idiots and useless eaters.

Now, Obama gets to have a war that is off the charts, thanks to Wall Street. He is a puppet on a string. He had his chance to be a leader, not a ruler. Stupid is as stupid does.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-02-13 8:10 AM

Both sides are wrong to fight each other and two wrongs don't make a right. If and when they tire of killing each other the fighting will end. You know the old saying "you cannot teach an old dog new tricks".

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-02-13 5:24 AM

What do you mean Republicans don't stand for anything? They stand for war. Your sons and daughters get to fight and die like dogs, their sons and daughters like the Romney brothers, will stay home and be keyboard warriors.

If it is moral, ethical, justifiable and legal, it is game on. The drones will be set aside and cruise missiles will take over.

It is for oil and riches, like any war, even during the Civil War, control of oil was part of the fight.

Now go on out there and get your war on so Republicans can steal more billions.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-01-13 10:13 PM

We've heard for years how thoroughly liberals have blamed former Pres. Bush for, well, everything that's happened in Pres. Obama's first term and now in this present one.

But if Pres. Obama decides to go into Syria, the consequences of that decision are all his, no matter the triple axels certain spinners would take to pin the responsibility elsewhere.

There is no Pres. Bush involved in this decision about war with Syria. At all. It's all Pres. Obama.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-01-13 10:04 PM

"Did not work on (former Pres.) Bill (Clinton)--the most popular man in the world today."

willgrr, I should c/p something you said, that thing about something coming up in your mouth, I think it was.

Well, if I find it before this moment passes, I'll c/p. It seems very fitting...

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-01-13 7:38 PM

dustOff3, with him it is one and the same.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-01-13 6:30 PM

Legend, you are right. Obama didn't have war on his mind when he went off-script with his red lie comment. He stepped in it, his advisors have said as much.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-01-13 5:03 PM

Obama did not say he wanted a war with Syria. Saying nothing about crossing a line with chemical weapons would be a sign of weakness. Compared to Bush/Cheney and Iraq; our president looks and acts like a good statesman. His opponents criticise him whether he moves left or right. It is Carl Rove's same plan used on Bill Clinton. Did not work on Bill--the most popular man in the world today. Rove is now called a failure by the very people that hired him.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Sep-01-13 11:47 AM

Whistler, whatever happened to we gone all of a sudden....I'll grant that someone was not at peas with something you said and hoped for some change....

That said, I am SO busy growing peas near Hillsboro....peas we will send with our another Mid-East war....I had thought peasful days had come when Rugby, willies, verts, and I got our Obama I just realize Booosh said if he had a son, that it would look just like Obama...

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-31-13 11:57 AM

I agree with Rugby that the military is, as I have stated before, only there for my Democrat friends to join and make a 'career' of.....and to then collect a pension for doing a nonmilitary my friend Rugby has. It is ONLY a 'jobs, jobs, jobs' program to keep unemployment at a dare Booosh.....or now Obama.....lead us into another illegal and immoral war.....after all, this is not the military of the old friend should have NEVER been called to serve after he voluntarily joined and re-upped for the military. That was just wrong....

Peas and Always Faithful

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-31-13 9:19 AM

Well, ok, Veritas, now that I read the first post with the second post's interpretation, I suppose I can see you agreeing with DustOff. I guess.

And all of us, whether we like to think of it as such, are blabbing our viewpoints in some way every time we post here.

I'm reminded of an age-old question: why did you climb the mountain? Because it was there....

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-30-13 4:05 PM

Worried American: I agree. They want to sit back and bash any decision that doesn't benefit them the same as they have done for the last five years If Syria was bigger in oil they would be earning that money in their lined pockets. Oil is bright red.

3 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-30-13 3:56 PM

The "Obama crossed the line" threat sent a message that the world is watching and was definitely better than doing nothing. We have been watching this from the beginning and "kneejerk reaction" does not fit the circumstance. I favor doing nothing with weapons. It is cheap to badmouth the president when he is trying to do the right thing. He is not trying to lie us into war.

4 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-30-13 9:49 AM

Where is the GOP leadership on this? Where are all these "Chicken Hawks" that wanted "action" in Syria? The U.S. Congress could take action on this? Where are they? On another recess! Out of town! On another vacation! Everyone is so busy running for the next election that no one is doing anything! This country is falling like Rome!

2 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 21 of 21 comments


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web