The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Americans Say "No" To U.S. Involvement in Syria- Despite Chemical Weapons Used by Government

oh, and just from CNN... now the Saudis are officially egging on a US led strike, saying something to the effect the Assad regime has "crossed the bounds of infamy".:rolleyes:

The Saudis...

If that batch had any vision, there would be several fewer problems over there. With respect to them and Syria...

give Jordan and Iraq a few billion each for enough territory to give the Saudis an avenue straight to Syria, and let them annex the place.

:square:
 
If that's true why would Obama waste time going thru the expected rubber stamp of a Congress "not in his camp"...ah...to show his LACK of partisanship? LOL. Now, THAT may make some sense at last but given his agenda ...nope. Oh and it's not a personal agenda but a political one. Unless you think the man cannot be separated from the office.

But any way you look at it. 100% chance of approval. The action will be almost just a formality in terms of the "attack" of course. Iran doesn't make any difference either. Russia might if they threaten a break of diplomacy over it or something almost impossible. Won't happen. Any more than Korea sending troops or Bolivia etc....

Somethings are kinda etched in stone. Obama's agenda is one of them.

Are you serious? This has virtually no chance of passing the House. The Senate is very debatable, but I don't think it will even pass the Senate. Even if it does, it has zero chance of passing the House. Once that vote occurs and this is voted down, Obama will feign outrage ... then this issue will quickly be swept under the carpet.

He will not attack Syria at this rate. The American people won't stand for it and leaders of virtually every other country, as was stated in this thread, are telling him not to get involved.
 

The first article doesn't present any evidence of the use of chemical weapons by the US and/or allies.

The second is a mixed batch, but it doesn't give evidence of anything recent.

The third is little different from the second -- though it's high point is noting that Rumsfeld met and shook hands with Saddam Hussein right after it was learned that Hussein had ordered the use of chemical weapons. Two evil men....
 
...seriously?

Yes, seriously.

Obama gave us the Heritage Foundation's (and Mitt Romney's) plan for health care in America. Not the universal coverage that Democrats wanted.

Obama preserved almost all of GWB's tax cuts for the wealthy. In fact, he raised taxes on the middle class proportionately more than rich people, if you consider his failure to extend the payroll tax cut an "increase." For all his talk about inequality in the American tax structure, it has actually gotten worse during his administration.

He has kept GWB's extrajudicial prisons open, and has continued to imprison people without trial indefinitely. (Yes, I know he has had resistance from Congress in dealing with this, but he has put very little effort into trying to overcome this).

He has kept GWB's intrusive spy programs on Americans going. He has done nothing to correct the abuses we have seen, seems disinterested in addressing the issue, and even seems annoyed that people are demanding their Constitutional rights be enforced.

He was opposed to gay marriage for almost the duration of his first term in office, until his vice president forced him to change his stance.

He proposes to attack a middle eastern country because of claims by our intelligence services that that country is using WMDs on its own people.

Obama is no Democrat (except in name). By many measures, Obama is more conservative than Ronald Reagan. Obama would very likely be a Republican if black people were allowed into that party.
 
I would agree he has no spine, but even progressive icons like FDR acted as president in ways that resembled reviled Republican policy. He's first and foremost for Obama. Though his instincts are much more liberal he has this tendency of for cynical and Machiavellian reasons moving much more cautiously to the left than most liberals were under the impression he'd act as president. A truly left leaning Democrat would be just as ruinous to this country anyway, and less than a quarter of American voters consider themselves left of center so demographically a lefty Dem actually governing as a lefty Dem would be the death of the Democratic Party as a national one. Obama does seem though comfortable with the imperial type of presidency, and it is fair to point out how there is such a disconnect between the rhetoric and the real Obama.
 
Yes, seriously.

Obama gave us the Heritage Foundation's (and Mitt Romney's) plan for health care in America. Not the universal coverage that Democrats wanted.

Obama preserved almost all of GWB's tax cuts for the wealthy. In fact, he raised taxes on the middle class proportionately more than rich people, if you consider his failure to extend the payroll tax cut an "increase." For all his talk about inequality in the American tax structure, it has actually gotten worse during his administration.

He has kept GWB's extrajudicial prisons open, and has continued to imprison people without trial indefinitely. (Yes, I know he has had resistance from Congress in dealing with this, but he has put very little effort into trying to overcome this).

He has kept GWB's intrusive spy programs on Americans going. He has done nothing to correct the abuses we have seen, seems disinterested in addressing the issue, and even seems annoyed that people are demanding their Constitutional rights be enforced.

He was opposed to gay marriage for almost the duration of his first term in office, until his vice president forced him to change his stance.

He proposes to attack a middle eastern country because of claims by our intelligence services that that country is using WMDs on its own people.

Obama is no Democrat (except in name). By many measures, Obama is more conservative than Ronald Reagan. Obama would very likely be a Republican if black people were allowed into that party.

I barely picked myself up from off the ground... this post! My goodness! I'm bummed about Guantanamo still being open. I'm realistic about spying (it's a necessary evil). Raising taxes on an economy barely leaving the recession is bad politics and bad economics. Obama supported gay marriage as a state legislator in Illinois. He was being pragmatic; he can't become president being pro-gay. People who can read between the lines know that the only evolving going on was Americans' attitudes towards us.

Being liberal means you support the little guy. You support the people without a voice. Some times those people are racial or sexual minorities. Some times those people live overseas. Living in a world that is limited to just your country isn't very progressive. The injustice and bloodshed Syrian men, women, and children have suffered through the last two years is something progressives should be fighting for. We aren't the cold-hearted party.
 
I barely picked myself up from off the ground... this post! My goodness! I'm bummed about Guantanamo still being open. I'm realistic about spying (it's a necessary evil). Raising taxes on an economy barely leaving the recession is bad politics and bad economics. Obama supported gay marriage as a state legislator in Illinois. He was being pragmatic; he can't become president being pro-gay. People who can read between the lines know that the only evolving going on was Americans' attitudes towards us.

I hope that Obama is not the man you claim him to be.

I would not care much for a president who pretended to believe in things he did not, just to get elected. And then, once elected on the basis of these lies, proceeded to legislate differently than he had promised.

When true leaders are faced with a public which disagrees with them, they attempt to persuade the public to their way of thinking - not deceive the public into voting for someone who does not intend to represent their interests, however misinformed those interests may be.


Being liberal means you support the little guy. You support the people without a voice. Some times those people are racial or sexual minorities. Some times those people live overseas.

Yes, exactly.


Living in a world that is limited to just your country isn't very progressive. The injustice and bloodshed Syrian men, women, and children have suffered through the last two years is something progressives should be fighting for. We aren't the cold-hearted party.

Helping the oppressed doesn't always mean bombing and killing them.
 
I barely picked myself up from off the ground... this post! My goodness! I'm bummed about Guantanamo still being open. I'm realistic about spying (it's a necessary evil). Raising taxes on an economy barely leaving the recession is bad politics and bad economics. Obama supported gay marriage as a state legislator in Illinois. He was being pragmatic; he can't become president being pro-gay. People who can read between the lines know that the only evolving going on was Americans' attitudes towards us.

Being liberal means you support the little guy. You support the people without a voice. Some times those people are racial or sexual minorities. Some times those people live overseas. Living in a world that is limited to just your country isn't very progressive. The injustice and bloodshed Syrian men, women, and children have suffered through the last two years is something progressives should be fighting for. We aren't the cold-hearted party.

There is no way the US can help women and children in Syria -- period. That's just the cold, hard reality of things. No matter what we do, the violence is going to continue. If we weaken Assad, as you suggest, we aid Al Qaeda -- so from a very real politik point of view, favoring attacking anything Assad has at this point is support for burkas and "honor" killings.
 
Are you serious? This has virtually no chance of passing the House. The Senate is very debatable, but I don't think it will even pass the Senate. Even if it does, it has zero chance of passing the House. Once that vote occurs and this is voted down, Obama will feign outrage ... then this issue will quickly be swept under the carpet.

He will not attack Syria at this rate. The American people won't stand for it and leaders of virtually every other country, as was stated in this thread, are telling him not to get involved.

American people may not stand for it but they can't do anything.
 
Of course they can -- it would take only ten or twenty thousand reminding the Tea Party klingons in the House that Obama can't be trusted.

LOL. The can but they never will. Tea party is a joke about like Communist party in effectiveness.

gggggggggggg
 
American people may not stand for it but they can't do anything.

Sure they can. They can and they will vote those that vote for this authorization of force out of office. And these Congressmen know this. We got an election next year where repercussions will be felt for this.
 
Obama may have dodged a bullet on this. According to Devin Nunes, a California Republican, the GOP House plans to vote "No" and he does not believe the votes are even close.

House Republicans are poised to reject President Obama’s resolution to authorize military force against Syria absent the administration convincing a strong majority of typically anti-war Democrats to back the legislation.

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/2013/09/0...thumbs-down-intervention-syria##ixzz2dkOYVCQa

Better for Obama to be embarrassed and deal with his ego being hurt than to be impeached and removed from office if he would have went ahead with this without going to Congress.
 
Helping the oppressed doesn't always mean bombing and killing them.

The opposition to Syrian intervention is purely emotional. Please show me where Obama or any one in the administration has said that striking people--civilians--is a part of the war strategy.

I've asked for links on many occasions in the last few days that would back up some of the claims people have said here to oppose America striking Assad and I haven't received one link yet.

Siding with the people would include sending a swift, but strong, message to a dictator that using sarin isn't permissible.
 
LOL. The can but they never will. Tea party is a joke about like Communist party in effectiveness.

gggggggggggg

Wow -- you are really out of touch!

The Tea Partites are the most powerful faction in the House. Boehner has to bend over and kiss their collective ass weekly at least. Get and read the book Do Not Ask What Good We Do, for a beginning understanding of what's going on.
 
The opposition to Syrian intervention is purely emotional. Please show me where Obama or any one in the administration has said that striking people--civilians--is a part of the war strategy.

I've asked for links on many occasions in the last few days that would back up some of the claims people have said here to oppose America striking Assad and I haven't received one link yet.

Siding with the people would include sending a swift, but strong, message to a dictator that using sarin isn't permissible.

Siding with which people -- Al Qaeda and the other terrorists? the Islamists?

If "the people" were against Assad, this would have already been over.
 
Wow -- you are really out of touch!

The Tea Partites are the most powerful faction in the House. Boehner has to bend over and kiss their collective ass weekly at least. Get and read the book Do Not Ask What Good We Do, for a beginning understanding of what's going on.

I am a Canadian transplant so maybe so. Sounds like a good read anyway and am looking for some new material. Thanks. :||

But in the Senate they aren't the most powerful faction.

Sarah Palin says "Let Allah Sort it Out"

http://www.teaparty.org/palin-on-syria-let-allah-sort-it-out-28026/

Just a cursory glance at tea party page indicates they are crackpots.
 
I am a Canadian transplant so maybe so. Sounds like a good read anyway and am looking for some new material. Thanks. :||

It's a good read, all right -- a bit sickening, and very eye-opening about the juvenile shenanigans that pass for serious business in the nation's capital, but a good read.

Just a cursory glance at tea party page indicates they are crackpots.

LOL No kidding.

One must keep in mind though, that crackpots can garner power.
 
Back
Top