B-Man Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 Lol........IowaHawk exposes the Left's (standard) hypocrisy David Burge @ iowahawkblog Global warming has apparently wiped out the Puff-Chested North American War Protester. 8:19 PM - 27 Aug 2013 402 Retweets 144 favorites Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 Lol........IowaHawk exposes the Left's (standard) hypocrisy David Burge @ iowahawkblog Global warming has apparently wiped out the Puff-Chested North American War Protester. 8:19 PM - 27 Aug 2013 402 Retweets 144 favorites That's brilliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 I actually heard on the radio this morning someone explaining how attacking Syria would be an example of the doctrine of "proactive self-defense" COMPLETELY different from the Bush Doctrine of "preemptive war." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 I actually heard on the radio this morning someone explaining how attacking Syria would be an example of the doctrine of "proactive self-defense" COMPLETELY different from the Bush Doctrine of "preemptive war." 99% of sales is presentation and phrasing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 Frankly we should just let the civil war play out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 Frankly we should just let the civil war play out. Yup... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 Weapons of Mass Distraction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 99% of sales is presentation and phrasing. A specialty of this very transparent administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 From the New York Times Op-Ed pages. Bomb Syria, Even if It Is Illegal. Gee...........I wonder if there is a Democrat in the White House ? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 From the New York Times Op-Ed pages. Bomb Syria, Even if It Is Illegal. Gee...........I wonder if there is a Democrat in the White House ? . In Hurd's defense, he's just arguing the supremacy of moral authority over legal right, and being entirely consistent with it in reference to Iraq and Kosovo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 Is there something wrong with us letting a brutal dictatorship and Al Qaeda backed rebels duke it out? Why do we need to be involved? !@#$ them and the camels they rode in on. Both sides would cheer if another 911 happened here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passepartout Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 Even the UN will not get involved at all! At least not yet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frostbitmic Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 Wouldn't it be in the worlds best interest to let the middle east exterminate themselves ? Get your popcorn ready Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 So Russia is blocking the way in the UN, the Coalition of the Willing is becoming more like a Coalition of the Maybes, and Congress isn't too keen on military action At least Bush had Congressional support, UN support, and international allies. Maybe they should have given Bush the Nobel prize instead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 At least Bush had Congressional support, UN support, and international allies. Maybe they should have given Bush the Nobel prize instead You sure about that? I know it was a decade ago, but I keep reading that Bush lied and acted unilaterally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 So Russia is blocking the way in the UN, the Coalition of the Willing is becoming more like a Coalition of the Maybes, and Congress isn't too keen on military action At least Bush had Congressional support, UN support, and international allies. Maybe they should have given Bush the Nobel prize instead You talking about Iraq or Afghanistan? Because Bush didn't have UN support for Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 So Russia is blocking the way in the UN, the Coalition of the Willing is becoming more like a Coalition of the Maybes, and Congress isn't too keen on military action At least Bush had Congressional support, UN support, and international allies. Maybe they should have given Bush the Nobel prize instead http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/dem-congressman-constitution-requires-congressional-authorization-use-force-against-syria_751350.html "The Constitution requires that, barring an attack on the United States or an imminent threat to the U.S., any decision to use military force can only be made by Congress -- not by the President. The decision to go to war -- and we should be clear, launching a military strike on another country, justified or not, is an act of war -- is reserved by the Constitution to the American people acting through their elected representatives in Congress. Since there is no imminent threat to the United States, there is no legal justification for bypassing the Constitutionally-required Congressional authorization. “Consultation” with Congress is not sufficient. The Constitution requires Congressional authorization." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 (edited) The Constitution requires Congressional authorization." why would this administration suddenly begin to respect the constraints of the US constitution? it's not like it's ever mattered to them before. Edited August 29, 2013 by Azalin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 why would this administration suddenly begin to respect the constraints of the US constitution? it's not like it's ever mattered to them before. I found the quote to be relevant because it comes from Democratic congressman Jerrold Nadler, who is the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 I found the quote to be relevant because it comes from Democratic congressman Jerrold Nadler, who is the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice. oh, I understand and agree with your point. it's just the complete lack of respect from this administration toward constitutional restraint often inspires bursts of sarcasm on my part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts