Phun and Gamez in the Med

Anybody else hear that the Russians are sending war ships to the region? I heard while flipping through the radio stations earlier. I wonder if we've already past the point of being in too deep?

yamaha wrote: People forget why it is that we're the ones called into these messes. It isn't because we are war mongerers or because we don't like the world. We are the only ones with the capabilities to do so. How many years did the genocide continue in Yugoslavia/bosnia before we ended up there(backing a weak UN presence) For further explaination, please watch "The World Without US" Its a good eye opener.

This. I'll expand a bit further: since we are the world's only superpower (China? Russia? Don't make me laugh) everybody expects us to go in and fix this kind of stuff. When we do show up the locals start some E36 M3, we shoot back, some eggs get broken and we are the Great Satan again.

For this reason I think the best decision Bush II made was to stay the berkeley out of Darfur. I think we need to stay the berkeley out of Syria too, let it fly apart on its own.

Brits just voted against military action in Syria. We might be going in on this alone.

rebelgtp wrote: Brits just voted against military action in Syria. We might be going in on this alone.

We should take the hint.

I always find it funny (in a sad way) that when ever china and russia vote against something on the security council, it is because they have been supplying the people the council wants to stop

(Inspectors wandering through war zone)

"hmmm, more bodies, lets see, arms mostly gone, face missing, heavy burns, looks like an artillery shell... OK"

"let's see... this one is mostly intact, throat cut... looks like it took a few tries... OK"

"and this one.... shot in the stomach..bled out... this one probably took a while do die.. you can see where he was crawling... OK"

"hmmm... this one is strange... no obvious wounds... foaming at the mouth... I think they were poisoned by gas... Well that's just WRONG!!, something must be done!!"

In reply to aircooled:

Have to love the Gentleman's agreements that took place after WW1......

mad_machine wrote: I always find it funny (in a sad way) that when ever china and russia vote against something on the security council, it is because they have been supplying the people the council wants to stop

Yeah, it's almost as funny (in a sad way) that those who are considering action against Syria are the same as those who whined, beotched and even campaigned against this same kind of E36M3 just a few years ago.

Politics sucks when our politicians are so good at sucking.

In honor of current events this is my new wallpaper on my laptop.

aircooled wrote: (Inspectors wandering through war zone) "hmmm, more bodies, lets see, arms mostly gone, face missing, heavy burns, looks like an artillery shell... OK" "let's see... this one is mostly intact, throat cut... looks like it took a few tries... OK" "and this one.... shot in the stomach..bled out... this one probably took a while do die.. you can see where he was crawling... OK" "hmmm... this one is strange... no obvious wounds... foaming at the mouth... I think they were poisoned by gas... Well that's just WRONG!!, something must be done!!"

I was thinking the same thing.

In reply to rebelgtp:

What's that from?

In reply to yamaha:

There are a series of pictures I found of that character working his way through a post apoc world. Not really sure where it is from sadly.

Here are a couple more

EDIT apparently from a game called Stalker

aircooled wrote: (Inspectors wandering through war zone) "hmmm, more bodies, lets see, arms mostly gone, face missing, heavy burns, looks like an artillery shell... OK" "let's see... this one is mostly intact, throat cut... looks like it took a few tries... OK" "and this one.... shot in the stomach..bled out... this one probably took a while do die.. you can see where he was crawling... OK" "hmmm... this one is strange... no obvious wounds... foaming at the mouth... I think they were poisoned by gas... Well that's just WRONG!!, something must be done!!"

Exactly. I find it strange to ban one type of weapon or ammo and not another.

I think the best quote I've heard on this subject (paraphrased from memory):

All of the parties involved have a reason to be doing what it is they are doing with or to Syria. None of those reasons are the well being of the Syrian people.

If Obama were clever and wanted to back out of his "Cross that line, rabbit, I dares ya" Yosemite Sam tough guy move without looking weak he could leave this up to Congress and re-emphasize his rail against Bush using executive powers to go to war.

My bet? He has been working on this for 2 years... missiles fly sometime early Sunday AM and nobody is asking Congress for permission first.

“The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” --Barack Obama ref: The Boston Globe, 2007.

Attacked Lybia in 2011 without Congressional consent.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” --Barack Obama ref: The Boston Globe, 2007. Attacked Lybia in 2011 without Congressional consent.

'Do as I say, not as I do.'

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” --Barack Obama ref: The Boston Globe, 2007. Attacked Lybia in 2011 without Congressional consent.

That document is getting so old and outdated...

Question: As noted, and as I have heard before, the President is not supposed to have these powers. What is the remedy? Who enforces this? Is the only remedy impeachment? Could the Supreme Court somehow rule on this? Is there anything built into the system to control such things? The branches are supposed to be checking each others powers right?

Clearly, this sort of thing has been going on for quite a while, so that is a bit of precedent. I am just curious where the "teeth" are on these laws (if that is even what you would call it).

The teeth would be impeachment. That will never happen, so, there are no teeth.

That's why several of us get a little bent every time someone brings up the old and outdated part. Follow all of it or none of it. There is no in between, there should be no gray area. We shouldn't even be having this discussion.

Damn, sucked in again.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: If Obama were clever and wanted to back out of his "Cross that line, rabbit, I dares ya" Yosemite Sam tough guy move.....

Thanks GPS, the world needs more Yosemite Sam references!

oldtin wrote: That document is getting so old and outdated...

I know, right? It's terribly inconvenient to have said something on the record, had your lackey back you up on it in videos and then have it turn out to be contrary to all of your actions.

Kerry is supposed to be making a statement right now....so far he is about 20 minutes late.

http://live.foxnews.com/#/2553565088001

oldsaw wrote: Yeah, it's almost as funny (in a sad way) that those who are considering action against Syria are the same as those who whined, beotched and even campaigned against this same kind of E36M3 just a few years ago. Politics sucks when our politicians are so good at sucking.

Truer words Oldsaw.

I'm hoping this isn't another rich guy's war and the rest of our's fight.

Xceler8x wrote: I'm hoping this isn't another rich guy's war and the rest of our's fight.

When is it any other way?