Comments on: Congress should lead on Syria http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/06/07/congress-should-lead-on-syria/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: pavoter1946 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/06/07/congress-should-lead-on-syria/#comment-73183 Mon, 10 Jun 2013 12:51:35 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=21090#comment-73183 Declaring war against a country that poses no threat to the United States is absurd. And to let the warmongers in the Senate lead the charge (McCain, Graham, et.al) is even more insane.

The problem is not so much that the US intervenes militarily too often (it does), it is the massive profits that doing so reaps for those supporting war but naturally not having to get their hands dirty in doing to.

In declaring war against a country, that gives them the green light to strike back at the US in whatever form they wish.

But then considering consequences has never been a strong point of Congress. Nor does the media even probe what the consequences will be.

If Congress wants to go to war, let them grab a rifle and head to the front lines.

]]>
By: chyron http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/06/07/congress-should-lead-on-syria/#comment-73179 Sun, 09 Jun 2013 21:59:56 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=21090#comment-73179 Even substantial rumors of USA declaring war on SAR will bring world back to the peak of Cold War – we already threw our weight behind Assad, so expect permanent fleet exercises with live fires off the Syrian cost for starters, and in case of accidents it’ll be not some S-300s US AF to be thinking about, it’ll be SS-18s,SS-25s and SS-27s for any american.

]]>
By: Fromkin http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/06/07/congress-should-lead-on-syria/#comment-73174 Sun, 09 Jun 2013 01:09:13 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=21090#comment-73174 “Indeed, it has been more than 70 years since Pearl Harbor and the war declaration that followed.”

Since then no country has provoked or attacked the US. If the US attacks Syria it would be the aggressor. It would be a real war. The only victory to expect is a Vietnam type of victory. Thousands of US soldiers would come home in body bags.

The Jewish lobby which intimidates members of Congress, according to Hagel, is pushing Congress to attack Israel’s enemies. In this case the US will go to war against Syria, Iran, Hezbollah which will be backed by Russia and China. This will be tougher than Vietnam and the US would meet the same fate that USRR met in Afghanistan:defeat.

]]>
By: ptiffany http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/06/07/congress-should-lead-on-syria/#comment-73173 Sat, 08 Jun 2013 18:25:13 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=21090#comment-73173 Some of us never learn. Bomb – Bomb – Bomb, Bomb-Bomb X-country. It’s the drumbeat of the blind hawks who have investments in arms manufacturing paid by US “foreign aid”.

]]>
By: Splitter226 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/06/07/congress-should-lead-on-syria/#comment-73171 Sat, 08 Jun 2013 15:27:15 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=21090#comment-73171 This is a no-brainer for the members of Congress – OUR Congress – based on the final paragraph of the article.
Members of Congress face an upcoming reelection, right? If they debate and vote in FAVOR of war against Syria, then they can pretty much kiss their reelection bid on its hairy backside.
However, No-Can-Do-Billy-Bobama is already on the way OUT of the White House. NO reelection in his future.
Now, I’m no rocket scientist, but I can pretty much guess what OUR congressional misleaders are thinking…

]]>
By: EconCassandra http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/06/07/congress-should-lead-on-syria/#comment-73170 Sat, 08 Jun 2013 13:07:20 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=21090#comment-73170 Congress?

Lead?

hahahahahahhahahahha …

]]>
By: Shamizar http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/06/07/congress-should-lead-on-syria/#comment-73169 Sat, 08 Jun 2013 11:27:09 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=21090#comment-73169 So, we should declare war on Syria because we don’t like the way their civil war is going? Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Really sets a great precedent, doesn’t it? McCain, for one, is itching to get us into another war. I’m not certain whether he is crazy or merely as stupid as he appears to be. Considering his running mate in his presidential campaign, however, I’m leaning toward the latter.

]]>
By: Dyota http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/06/07/congress-should-lead-on-syria/#comment-73166 Sat, 08 Jun 2013 07:48:56 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=21090#comment-73166 Congress should does go to Syria, they won’t be missed, they are what’s wrong with this country, and all their corrupt campaign contributions, that would send them to Jail in other parts of the world.

]]>
By: Dyota http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/06/07/congress-should-lead-on-syria/#comment-73165 Sat, 08 Jun 2013 07:45:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=21090#comment-73165 We already had one disastrous war in the Middle East, If Mcain and the rest of Congress want a war, they should pick up their kids and go to war. Just leave the US military out of it. Who do we side with, in case you didn’t notice, it’s Iran Iraq and Syria Vs Alqaeda, moderated have been sidelined that’s what’s going on. Don’t be silly, how can they let you write an oped when you don’t know the facts or history

]]>
By: Nirbijan http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/06/07/congress-should-lead-on-syria/#comment-73163 Fri, 07 Jun 2013 22:17:08 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=21090#comment-73163 To declare the war require clear thinking, understanding of consequences and courage – the qualities that current congress with 10% approval rating is clearly lacking.

]]>