How did you like Obama's speech on his Syrian policy tonight?

This would cost money. I call on all real conservatives to reject anybody who wants the government to tax people’s hard earned dollars to pay for big Government suppressing a sovereign state’s rights.

why not kill the evil murderer Assad?

If you remove the government, you have to govern. You break it, you bought it.

That’s how Iraq was so badly botched. The US destroyed the government without a plan for replacing it.

@jaytkay

Other than Colin Powell’s self doubt and sense of guilt, where does it say that?
The good defeats evil.
If evil takes it’s place, you deal with that too.
The US, in it’s moral confusion destroyed Iraq’s government and then did not occupy Iraq. No other plan works after military conquest. De facto evidence of moral confusion. If you send the military, send them to occupy. Otherwise, don’t send the military.

@josie Wait! Why is it not greed to take other people’s money to enforce your morality? Do you know how much a cruise missile costs?

If you send the military, send them to occupy. Otherwise, don’t send the military.

OK,.

That’s why not to kill the evil murderer Assad.

@jaytkay
So what is this dog and pony show all about?
Why not ignore it?

@josie Kill Assad you hand Syria over to al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Iran or the Muslim Brotherhood. That’s the only opposition there with years of military and political organization already in place. Were you a foreign policy adviser in the Bush Administration?

As to the speech, he got a lot right. Recent developments made it a lot easier task. But the fundamental flaw with the US enforcing International Law is that it violates International Law for us to do it unilaterally. There are, under International Law, only 2 things that justify a nation using military force against another nation. One is self defense when the nation in question has been attacked. The other is under the auspices of the UN. We can’t enforce the rule of International Law by violating it. He never “splained” his way out of that gaping contradiction.

@ETpro But, do not true conservatives have a problem with “International” law? Do they not believe that “American” law should trump all and that one of the major problems we have in the US today is that we stray from the US law only attitude and try to incorporate a more worldly perspective instead of the narrow egocentric locus.

@Josie at no point has da prez ever mentioned killing Assad. As I have mentioned in other threads the biggest problem with US policy is that we never seem to target the HEAD of the snake, only landing body blows that kill minions. And, I believe it is because the fear that if they do target leaders then they themselves will become targets and they are nothing if not chicken shit cowards who depend on the naivety of the young and easily swayed to protect their sacred asses.

@rojo True conservatives? You need to look up the word. Virtually everyone calling themselves that in America today acts in the exact opposite of the definition. They are revolutionary regressives, and not anything remotely like conservative. I’m a conservative. That’s how come I know who isn’t one.

We killed the elected leader of Iran and installed the Shah. That sure went well. We have targeted 50 world leaders for CIA asaassination. We bumped off Saddam with the US Army. Iraq is now spinning toward civil war which will predictably leave it a Shiite client state of Iran.

Woopidoo. We sure made things better there!~

Ah but, the problem @ETpro is that in both Iran and Iraq after killing them we then went and tried to fix it ourselves the way we thought it should be instead of just saying “OK, you guys try again, and if we don’t like that choice, he is also toast too”.

Just like we should have done in Afghanistan. We said give us Bin Ladin or we will kill you. And we did. We beat the fuck out of their government, had we just stopped there and walked away they would have figured it out without all our money and dead soldiers.

@rojo I’m guessing that it the US makes an open practice of assassinating all heads of state we have a problem with, and leaving things to sort themselves out afterward, we will end up very soon a total international pariah. We’d have a whole list of successors to go through in Syria, as detailed above, before we’d have any hope of the secularists gaining the upper hand. And if they did eventually gain control thanks to numerous Islamists being assassinated by the US, they would lack any legitimacy or support with the entire Arab world. Got any better ideas?

Maybe @ETpro the answer is that we should take care of our own problems before we set ourselves up as the worlds moral conscience.

@rojo I’m willing to give that a try for a change.

@ETpro I am glad we could come to an agreement.

Now, how do we convince the guys that actually hold our lives in their hands to follow through with our plan?

@rojo Actually, based on Congress’ unwillingness to give the OK on a bombing run, they are convinced. This is one issue the left and right both agree on.

It smacked of the American pitbull straining at the leash who got distracted by a naughty French poodle bitch.

I loved the speech & Obama’s explnation of our duty. I’m pretty sure he’s Republican now lol

I heard O say nothing I hadn’t already heard, and sadly I came away feeling more than ever that, as I’m starting to read more and more, the our country is being run by fifth graders and that whatever the U.S. does our goose eagle is cooked.

Afterwards, I searched the cable channels looking for enlightening commentary and found for the most part only babbling heads arguing with each and telegraphing their limited knowledge and bias with every smirk, rolling eyes, and giggle, none more so than the ol’ Newt, whose pompousness is exceeded only by… well, come to think of it, by nothing.I’ve never been one to believe in isolationism, but Syria is starting to make me rethink that.

First of all @josie you are dead wrong on Obama being naive. Dead. Wrong. Bush was the naive jerk who did not know about the Sunnis or Shiites. Obama knows what he is doing. He wants to kill those who launched those brutal gas weapons but he wants America to have that same evil blood on their hands and not just him. That hardly qualifies as naive. One who wants to put blood on your hands, share it with you is leading you. Just follow and stop ridiculing your President even if you did not vote for him.

We need a larger UN security council and get rid of veto power. Resolutions get passed with > 51% majority. Resolutions that involve force with > 66% majority. Russia and China have no right to cripple the UN.

We also need a multinational world police force. We can’t expect the US to be the only world police force. Using chemical weapons means breaking international law. A detention order needs to be issued. The guilty people should be arrested and tried in an international court.

@mattbrowne How do they amend their charter? Isn’t it through the security council where any one permanent member can torpedo the whole effort?

@ETpro – Amending the charter is the problem. The world community needs to convince the veto powers to give up their veto rights.

@mattbrowne I see only two chances of that happening, fat and slim. But I’ve been surprised many times before. One can certainly hope.