Why is John Kerry beating the war drum so hard?
 

Not sure who elected him head cheerleader?

pull my finger

http://i.imgur.com/axhLdU5.jpg

He stands to gain. Why else?

Kerry does what Obama tells him to do.

He is a member of the Skull and Bones. His S&B member name is "Long Devil"

I guess the double date didn't go well? Assad didn't agree to a full swap?

http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/u...sad-dinner.jpg

I believe head cheerleaders are appointed not elected...:winkwink:

:1orglaugh:thumbsup

Precisely; Obama wants to get involved so naturally his cabinet is going to be for it as well.

It only seems that way. When a sec. of state beats the peace drum, everyone yawns and falls asleep.

--:spawn

Obama initially wanted Susan Rice for Secretary of State - Kerry was installed.

I noticed he was beating the war drum pretty hard just a few hours ago. I found it interesting.

Great, let's just assume Syria is using Chemical weapons. We still need to stay out of it.

Someone has to be the fall guy, and it ain't gonna be the sitting president.

When Kerry speaks, lots of people fall asleep.

... 2016 is near ... SOMEONE's got to oppose Hillary.

He will not be the one for sure

Saw fucking Nancy Pelosi coming out of the meeting today and ready to go to war!

It's unbelievable. These goddamned idiots are actually chomping at the bit to bomb another Muslim country.
We are fucked.

And all of you who voted for Democrats and Republicans are now getting exactly what the fuck you deserved. Power hungry politicians.

i just wanted to post this:
http://i3.mirror.co.uk/incoming/arti...09-2246833.jpg

but you are faster

Yep...fucking politicians.

Bin Laden was their fucking buddy when Russia invaded Afghanistan.

Sadaam was their good friend for years.

And as you see in that picture...they go to dinner with the same guy they are calling a "madman" and accusing of chemical weapons use.

When will the people of the U.S. stop electing these fucking crooks? They don't give a shit about anything but how much money they are making for their cronies (in this case...military weapons manufacturers)

In fact, the dinner date between Kerry and his wife and Assad and his wife took place in Damascus in February 2009, when Kerry was a U.S. senator from Massachusetts and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.

Different time, different roles, different circumstances. Yet the story clucks: “The images ... come in stark contrast to comments Mr. Kerry recently made about the Syrian president, describing him as a ‘thug’ and drawing comparisons between Mr. Assad and Adolf Hitler over their use of chemical weapons.”


This cheap shot isn’t unique.

When the U.S. began to distance itself from Egyptian autocrat Hosni Mubarak, also in 2011, ABC News reported that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton -- in 2009! -- had volunteered in an interview that “I really consider President and Mrs. Mubarak to be friends of my family.”

Clinton probably shouldn’t have been so gushing, especially in an interview in which she acknowledged that the State Department had issued a report faulting Egypt for its human rights record. But diplomacy inevitably involves engagement, and sometimes socializing, with more or less unsavory foreign leaders.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opini...,3210206.story

so this is every american's fault but your's eh. and bombing syria is what they deserve.

dang.

He slept in the Queen's spare bedroom

Here is all the incriminating evidence we need, he's caught (below) visiting a known war criminal in London, notice how Assad is checking to see if he's been spotted

Reading a bedtime story to the pope

Hold on a Second chaps, I've got to the bottom of this one now; Assad is the False Flag, check out the date of his birthday

"Bashar al-Assad was born in Damascus on 11 September..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashar_al-Assad

Something tells me Syria will get attacked on the NWO's favorite date

http://www.tchadonline.com/wp-conten...y-el-assad.jpg

http://www.lapresse.ca/images/bizpho...y-regrette.jpg

Sarkozy is anyway a hypocrite

Why is that? Because he meets with heads of government that may not all see eye to eye on everything?

I think you know what I mean. People keep voting for the same damn thing every time expecting something different.
Well, if you want real "hope and change" then you have to vote for something different than a Dempublican.

How is it that people would be cool with a country gassing it's own citizens? Hitler would fucking thrive if some people from this age went back in time! Disgusting!

We didn't go to war with Hitler over him killing millions and millions of people in gas chambers.

We went to war because the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.

If you look back at what happened...He went on gassing Jews for years with his "final solution" and nobody did a thing about it.

Only when he was about to take down Great Britain and then the Japs nailed us at Pearl Harbor did we go in.
It wasn't in our national interest to go in and attack another sovereign nation unless it threatens us.

The United States is not supposed to be the policeman for the world. We've been pulling that shit for a while and it got us hated by the world. It's why we have to go through security like common criminals now at airports.

Nope. We have no business lobbing cruise missiles and killing more Muslim people.

All we are doing is creating more terrorists. This shit is none of our business.

Can you imagine if another country had invaded us in the 1800's because of what our govt. did to native Americans? What we would call "ethnic cleansing" using todays bullshit jargon.

People are getting slaughtered all over the world right now. But we always seem to be politically selective about what "outrages" us.
Interfering in a civil war that is being fought amongst people who ALL hate our fucking guts is just plain out stupid.
We aren't supposed to be the ones attacking other countries. We are only supposed to use our military to defend OUR country.
But that seems to be a long-forgotten ideal.

I don't see how us killing MORE people in Syria with missiles is going to "help" anybody.

I'll resist the temptation to say no shit Sherlock and just say that the apathy we see right now today, even in threads like this, is sickening and I stand by it! Can anyone see to the end of their nose these days? Lets go ahead and pursue this just a TINY bit of the way OK? Everyone try to follow 2 steps without losing your minds.

For someone saying even if he gassed people we should still not do anything, is it just a matter of numbers for you then? 1400 people is just not enough, amirite? Whats your number then, genius? 10,000? 100,000? 1,000,000? Just how big a BLANK CHECK on sarin nerve gassings are you WILLINGLY giving to whatever brutal dictators are left on this planet?


Idiots! If you find yourself saying "we should not do anything even if he gassed people, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. I hope we've all learned a little something about ourselves today.
:321GFY

Tom, if you think I'm an "idiot" because I don't believe we should be killing MORE people with cruise missiles then so be it.

What do you personally think we are going to accomplish by killing MORE of those people?
Will they love us because we killed some more of them?

Now if we were going to send in CIA agents and assassinate their leader? Okay.
But of course our own heads of state don't want to do that because then it's open season on THEM.

No, they would much rather kill more of Syria's citizens with a "missile strike". That way they don't have to worry about a retaliatory assassination on their own sorry asses.

You can call me an "idiot" all day long. But I just don't see how killing MORE people is helpful to stop a guy from killing people. That doesn't make any goddamned sense at all.

And the thought that the United States Of America is in the business of attacking other sovereign nations who have NOT attacked us...is kinda fucked up. It's exactly what I was taught in school that we were "against".

In fact the Bush family bankrolled Hitler. Look into Prescott Bush.

settle down. you're just as fucking clueless as the rest of us, don't pull a better than thou bullshit on gfy. that shit ain't flyin.

you may think you're a fukcing bleeding heart but while your thinking your saving babies with your little fucking speech here, you aren't doing jack shit other than yapping your trap like the rest of us.

so shut the fuck up with the hypocrisy. you can't act like a fucking baby saver while calling people idiots and telling them you are better than them while you lay out some guilt trip you borrowed from your mom.

dipshit.

Prescott Bush was director of a bank who's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act.

Not just the bank but all of the companies he was invested in and or on the board of were.

Robbie and Rochard, you are spot on...
but its complicated.
first, its not really terrorist related and not directed against USA - no on attack.
then again, its beyond humanity to control people using chemical weapons - yes on attack.
but the rebels are considered hard muslims and likely to hate on USA in the future - no on attack.

whats the score? no wonder Obama doesnt want to take to the credit for an attack.

its a loose/loose situation.

I agree JP-Shooter...but my thought is that it isn't any of our business.

We already are sending drones into several other sovereign countries on a daily basis and killing people. And now we are going to kill thousands of Syrian citizens with our missiles to...save them???

Also...the U.S. is and has always been one of the world's largest manufacturers of chemical weapons. Hell...we used Agent Orange in the Vietnam War and killed people like cockroaches with it.
And this is just SOME of the stuff we know about:
"1985: U.S. resumes open-air testing of biological agents. U.S. firms begin supplying Iraq with numerous biological agents for a four-year period (according to a 1994 Senate report).

1986: U.S. resumes open-air testing of biological agents.

1987: Senate ties in three votes on resuming production of chemical weapons; Vice President Bush breaks all three ties in favor of resumption."

Bottom line is...we are not supposed to be killing people in other countries that have not attacked us first.

And secondly...DAMN dyna mo is in a bad mood! lol

i don't like to be guilt tripped by confused gfyers into bombing countries. i'll respond to that shit in kind.

Who I'm speaking to are those who've already said that even if he bombed his own people with chemical weapons that we should sit on our fattening asses and do nothing! I was VERY clear on that. Those people are idiots and you should realize it too.

People want to talk about lessons of WWII and maybe even think that we should do nothing until.... we're bombed? Is that the lesson we took away!? That our sit back and wait attitude almost let Hitler take over the world, so lets do THAT again to .... prevent WWIII!? Umm.. IDIOCY!


If you and others are still up in the air about this, CONGRATULATIONS you're not an idiot and I never said you were! If you are a person who thinks that we should do nothing even IF a country's leader gassed their own people?? You know what you are and you deserve your plaque of idiocy!!!! Look in the thread, see who they are, call them what they are.

Look, what I said is very clear and I'm sure I don't need to say it again but I will just for the record. If someone here or anywhere is going to say it's OK for a person to gas their own people without punitive punishment, they're an idiot who can't see long term effects of letting that go. YES it's speculation for a lot of people still whether he ordered it, whether it was a third party (evidently the Russians think it was a third party), or whether it was the rebels who did it.. but I don't think that's going to last. Supposedly we have intercepts of the gov. ordering their own troops to ready their gas masks, we saw the launches from gov. controlled areas, and saw where they landed. We've also seen the aftereffects and we know the nations red crescent leader was forbidden to send in help by the government though they deny it. This is called evidence and it's only mounting up higher. To be cynical is fine, to be undecided is normal, but to say even if we KNOW he did it we should do nothing? Pure idiocy!

i understand exactly what you were attempting to get at and i mean every fucking word i wrote.

i am 1 of those who thinks we should not be taking the lead here and we should not be drawing red lines in the sand like 3rd graders.

there's a system in place for this and it's fucking called the united nations.


we are supposed to let them take the lead on human rights violations.

the idiocy here is the usa taking the lead on this by responding with threats of violence as a punishment to assad's violence and what's worse, as a message to other countries.

certainly i don't have to explain wtf is wrong with that logic.

I've had a friend say "I don't know why we should be the worlds police. I'm just plain sick of it and sick of all of these conflicts." While we both agree that killing is killing, and dead is dead, we as a human species have gotten together and decided to BAN certain weapons. If someone else isn't going to do it, at least we have the worlds most jumbo sized military and we've got to be the ones to spank them hard!

This is OUTSIDE of their conflict and I've personally already said that no matter WHO used them, we need to find out and hit the responsible party. It's baffling to me how there could be people who would rather sit back and decide by apathy that killing SOME people with banned weapons is OK! What do you call them? Enlightened? War weary? Sorry; they're dumb.

The united nations. What a noble and failed concept it is. Sorry man, the Russians have veto power. So much for the UN solution. They're a trade partner with Syria and can't afford to dip their toe over there. Local politics trumps global politics. Neutering the UN solution before it is even attempted.

they've killed over 100,000 documented deaths over there while no one did shit. they kill a a couple hundred and now you are up in arms because why? it's not the way they killed the 99,800+ before them?


that makes zero sense. 0

now, *our* reaction to that ( and it is a reaction, it's not a response, there's a huge difference) is to punish them and send a message to other countries by killing more people.

and let's be crystal fucking clear: that is the exact reason we are being given for justification to bomb/attack. it's a punitive reaction and an attempt to send a message.

ummm, that's 3rd grade level diplomacy.

THEY ARE BANNED WEAPONS. PERIOD. What the...?!

YES, dead is dead, so why now? Chemical weapons.

And YES again, it will be a punitive attack! It will be punishment for using chemical weapons which are banned worldwide by treaty. That's the entire point, and it's the entire argument, and it's why this is not taking sides in a civil war, or forpetesakes joining a war. It is going to be a spanking and a damn hard one too in order to remind brutal fuckwits that you're not allowed to kill people that way. Kill them some other way and we'll sit here wringing our hands in debates! Use chemical or nuclear weapons? Fuck no you didn't.

Again, to be undecided or cynical of who made the attacks with the gas is totally normal. But to say outright right now that even if they were used that we should do nothing? Completely moronic and immoral! Those idiots are inviting hell.

Tom, I'd just like to point out the hypocrisy of the U.S. on this matter.

You are saying "banned weapons". Banned by whom?

The Geneva Weapons Convention happened in 1925. It was passed in 1928.
But the United States did NOT ratify it or abide by it until 1974!!!!

Yep, all the other civilized nations of the world did...but us.

We have the worlds largest stockpile of chemical weapons.

We are the biggest supplier of them.

We have USED them in many forms. (bacteriological, chemical, etc.)
I pointed out stuff like Agent Orange which we sprayed by the ton everyday over southeast Asia for a decade.

Our President's going all the way back to Roosevelt have made our country the only civilized Western power that reserves the right to use chemical weapons in a "first strike".

But forget all of that for a second...

Ask yourself: "What will be the results of us bombing Syria"?

How many civilians will WE kill? What will this do to our deteriorating relationship with Russia?

What does it mean for the U.S. to once again commit a war crime (attacking another sovereign nation without provocation...just like Iraq)?

And does killing MORE Syrians with our bombs really "deter" or "punish" the Syrian govt.? And will they now decide "I guess we better never do that again"?

Or is this just the media and our own govt. leading us like sheep into yet another killing field in an Arab country?

As great as the USA is it's just as bad.

:(