Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 7:46 am
The official CS.com poll.
Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums
FCS Football | Message Board | News
https://championshipsubdivision.com/forums/
Intervene in Syria or no?
https://championshipsubdivision.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=36920
Page 1 of 5
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 7:56 am
Will you be providing the results to Congress?
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 8:02 am
Hell no.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 8:07 am
I think we should be able to choose more than one option. 
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 8:36 am
FWIW, 80% of Americans oppose intervention.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/09/politics/ ... ?hpt=hp_t1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/09/politics/ ... ?hpt=hp_t1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 8:59 am
-
No
It's a good thing Romney didn't get in and we reelected the peace loving Obama administration
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/02/biden ... z2ePa4qhWJ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
No
It's a good thing Romney didn't get in and we reelected the peace loving Obama administration
Sept. 2, 2012, YORK, Pa. (AP) — Vice President Joe Biden said Sunday that Republican rival Mitt Romney is “ready to go to war in Syria and Iran” while hurting the middle class.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/02/biden ... z2ePa4qhWJ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:34 am
Seems like Russia is stepping to the forefront on this.
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/09/09/wa ... -on-syria/
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/09/09/wa ... -on-syria/
Yet watch Obama take all the credit.However, Russia might be ready to diffuse the situation between Syria and the United States.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov vowed to push Syria, a Russian ally, to place its chemical weapons under international control and then dismantle them to avert U.S. air strikes.
“If the establishment of international control over chemical weapons in that country would allow avoiding strikes, we will immediately start working with Damascus,” Lavrov said. “We are calling on the Syrian leadership to not only agree on placing chemical weapons storage sites under international control, but also on its subsequent destruction and fully joining the treaty on prohibition of chemical weapons,”
The move by Russia came a few hours after U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that Syria could resolve the crisis by turning over his entire arsenal of chemical weapons to the international community by the end of the week.
Syria has reportedly said that it welcomed the proposal from Russia, but hasn’t decided on a course of action as of noon Monday.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:48 am
Ah yes, the benevolent Russians, just looking out for the best interests of the rest of the world.DSUrocks07 wrote:Seems like Russia is stepping to the forefront on this.
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/09/09/wa ... -on-syria/
Yet watch Obama take all the credit.However, Russia might be ready to diffuse the situation between Syria and the United States.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov vowed to push Syria, a Russian ally, to place its chemical weapons under international control and then dismantle them to avert U.S. air strikes.
“If the establishment of international control over chemical weapons in that country would allow avoiding strikes, we will immediately start working with Damascus,” Lavrov said. “We are calling on the Syrian leadership to not only agree on placing chemical weapons storage sites under international control, but also on its subsequent destruction and fully joining the treaty on prohibition of chemical weapons,”
The move by Russia came a few hours after U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that Syria could resolve the crisis by turning over his entire arsenal of chemical weapons to the international community by the end of the week.
Syria has reportedly said that it welcomed the proposal from Russia, but hasn’t decided on a course of action as of noon Monday.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:57 am
Who in the world voted "yes" for this? Why do we care about a few hundred dead people due to gas when we've let 100,000+ die already without doing a thing?
If muslins want to kill each other, how can that be a bad thing? The world population is too high already.
If muslins want to kill each other, how can that be a bad thing? The world population is too high already.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 10:02 am
I'm a no on this. Especially since we've been telling Assad exactly what our plan is and I'm pretty sure we'll just launch some missiles targeting places where missiles used to be. Seems to me like a pretty stupid $350 Million boonedoggle.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 10:14 am
Since when has America done the same?Grizalltheway wrote:Ah yes, the benevolent Russians, just looking out for the best interests of the rest of the world.DSUrocks07 wrote:Seems like Russia is stepping to the forefront on this.
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/09/09/wa ... -on-syria/
Yet watch Obama take all the credit.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 10:28 am
WWI, WWII, and every humanitarian and natural disaster come to mind.DSUrocks07 wrote:Since when has America done the same?Grizalltheway wrote:
Ah yes, the benevolent Russians, just looking out for the best interests of the rest of the world.
We usually have Marines handing out MREs on the streets before the local ruler decides to come out of his mansion.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 10:30 am
Oh yeah, I forgot, we're the "good guys".93henfan wrote:WWI, WWII, and every humanitarian and natural disaster come to mind.DSUrocks07 wrote:
Since when has America done the same?
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 10:32 am
Just because we've had two of the most inept presidents in our history serve back to back does not make us bad guys.DSUrocks07 wrote:Oh yeah, I forgot, we're the "good guys".93henfan wrote:
WWI, WWII, and every humanitarian and natural disaster come to mind.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 10:41 am
Gore lost to Bush. We are sitting on 1 in a row.93henfan wrote:Just because we've had two of the most inept presidents in our history serve back to back does not make us bad guys.DSUrocks07 wrote:
Oh yeah, I forgot, we're the "good guys".
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:03 am
Is that an App State word?ASUG8 wrote:I'm a no on this. Especially since we've been telling Assad exactly what our plan is and I'm pretty sure we'll just launch some missiles targeting places where missiles used to be. Seems to me like a pretty stupid $350 Million boonedoggle.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:08 am
DSUrocks07 wrote:Seems like Russia is stepping to the forefront on this.
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/09/09/wa ... -on-syria/
Yet watch Obama take all the credit.However, Russia might be ready to diffuse the situation between Syria and the United States.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov vowed to push Syria, a Russian ally, to place its chemical weapons under international control and then dismantle them to avert U.S. air strikes.
“If the establishment of international control over chemical weapons in that country would allow avoiding strikes, we will immediately start working with Damascus,” Lavrov said. “We are calling on the Syrian leadership to not only agree on placing chemical weapons storage sites under international control, but also on its subsequent destruction and fully joining the treaty on prohibition of chemical weapons,”
The move by Russia came a few hours after U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that Syria could resolve the crisis by turning over his entire arsenal of chemical weapons to the international community by the end of the week.
Syria has reportedly said that it welcomed the proposal from Russia, but hasn’t decided on a course of action as of noon Monday.
Moscow is running circles around our Nobel Peace Prize winner. 
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:10 am
Yes, though it's usually spelled "NC A&T."Ivytalk wrote:Is that an App State word?ASUG8 wrote:I'm a no on this. Especially since we've been telling Assad exactly what our plan is and I'm pretty sure we'll just launch some missiles targeting places where missiles used to be. Seems to me like a pretty stupid $350 Million boonedoggle.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:24 am
At the beginning the GOP voted yes.How about Catholics killing each other?93henfan wrote:Who in the world voted "yes" for this? Why do we care about a few hundred dead people due to gas when we've let 100,000+ die already without doing a thing?
If muslins want to kill each other, how can that be a bad thing? The world population is too high already.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:34 am
Since you stated that as a fact, would you care to list the names and party affiliation of those who voted yes and those who voted no?dal4018 wrote:At the beginning the GOP voted yes.How about Catholics killing each other?93henfan wrote:Who in the world voted "yes" for this? Why do we care about a few hundred dead people due to gas when we've let 100,000+ die already without doing a thing?
If muslins want to kill each other, how can that be a bad thing? The world population is too high already.
In the meantime, you might want to look up what Kerry and Pelosi are saying about intervention.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:52 am
I guess I inserted the extra "e" out of habit.Ivytalk wrote:Is that an App State word?ASUG8 wrote:I'm a no on this. Especially since we've been telling Assad exactly what our plan is and I'm pretty sure we'll just launch some missiles targeting places where missiles used to be. Seems to me like a pretty stupid $350 Million boonedoggle.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:55 am
boonedoggle
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 12:19 pm
6.93% of Americans think we should fire the president into Syria.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 12:43 pm
They have already tested 200 pound bombs, they aren't very effective.....we should have known that.death dealer wrote:6.93% of Americans think we should fire the president into Syria.
Re: Intervene in Syria or no?
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 12:57 pm
This is a lose, lose situation. Nothing to be gained by intervening.
Besides, the environmental impact study shows the longer the war goes on the more people will be killed, thereby reducing emissions into the atmosphere and reducing global warming. Letting them kill themselves off is the green thing to do and is earth friendly...
Besides, the environmental impact study shows the longer the war goes on the more people will be killed, thereby reducing emissions into the atmosphere and reducing global warming. Letting them kill themselves off is the green thing to do and is earth friendly...