NOT our country, NOR is Egypt, and as Obama has said, unless the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY votes to act, we should NOT step in alone!! Maybe preventing a few hundred thousand deaths, and a few thousand of our own, by NOT following the “Bush Doctrine” is a wiser thought?
The red line refers to the use of chemical warfare and it is not a doctrine. There is uncertainty if and who used the chemicals. It could have been the rebels in order to trick the U.S. into providing assistance. Time for cool heads and restraint rather than the Bush/Cheney/McCain way who never saw a problem they didn’t think they could solve with big guns and the sacrifice of someone else’s sons and daughters.
While saying chemical weapons would be a “red line” requiring SOME form of action, was NOT specific, and yes, probably shouldn’t have been said, but it was NOT a call for an immediate “shock and awe” attack, like Dumb and Dumber launched. (That would be Cheney and Rumsfeld btw, not really the wimpy NG deserter from Texas chickenhawk ranks.)
The administration said they were not going to telegraph what they would do, but that there would be consequences (if they use nerve gas). So, wait and see.
“…..Deal with it Gypsy as you liberals like to say….”.What’s your point? Obama and the Obama administration said they would not tolerate use of nerve gas on civilian populations. They further said they would not telegraph a response, but that there would be consequences if the use of chemicals was confirmed. Its a complex situation, but they are taking a measured, and it seems a tough stance. What more do you want at this point?
Full marks for naïve arrogance that you think you know what Obama, the administration, and the International coalition that includes England and France are thinking, planning, and will do.
Dtroutma over 10 years ago
NOT our country, NOR is Egypt, and as Obama has said, unless the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY votes to act, we should NOT step in alone!! Maybe preventing a few hundred thousand deaths, and a few thousand of our own, by NOT following the “Bush Doctrine” is a wiser thought?
Gypsy8 over 10 years ago
The red line refers to the use of chemical warfare and it is not a doctrine. There is uncertainty if and who used the chemicals. It could have been the rebels in order to trick the U.S. into providing assistance. Time for cool heads and restraint rather than the Bush/Cheney/McCain way who never saw a problem they didn’t think they could solve with big guns and the sacrifice of someone else’s sons and daughters.
Dtroutma over 10 years ago
While saying chemical weapons would be a “red line” requiring SOME form of action, was NOT specific, and yes, probably shouldn’t have been said, but it was NOT a call for an immediate “shock and awe” attack, like Dumb and Dumber launched. (That would be Cheney and Rumsfeld btw, not really the wimpy NG deserter from Texas chickenhawk ranks.)
Gypsy8 over 10 years ago
The administration said they were not going to telegraph what they would do, but that there would be consequences (if they use nerve gas). So, wait and see.
Gypsy8 over 10 years ago
“…..Deal with it Gypsy as you liberals like to say….”.What’s your point? Obama and the Obama administration said they would not tolerate use of nerve gas on civilian populations. They further said they would not telegraph a response, but that there would be consequences if the use of chemicals was confirmed. Its a complex situation, but they are taking a measured, and it seems a tough stance. What more do you want at this point?
Gypsy8 over 10 years ago
Full marks for naïve arrogance that you think you know what Obama, the administration, and the International coalition that includes England and France are thinking, planning, and will do.