- Make an accusation
- Get immediately hysterical
- Launch missiles before anyone has a chance to discuss
It is well known among champions of peace that the only possible way to resolve a dispute, is to launch missiles into densely populated areas.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
Recent Comments
- D. Boss on The Clock Is Ticking
- William on The Clock Is Ticking
- arn on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- arn on The Clock Is Ticking
- Gordon Vigurs on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Disillusioned on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Disillusioned on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Francis Barnett on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- dm on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- arn on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
You forgot about beating up on a straw man.
It makes sense, in an Orwellian way, that a Nobel Peace Prize winner would be the one to pull the trigger on WW III.
Last time I checked he was seeking approval from Congress.
He does not need Congress approval, he knows it, I know it and so should you. He wants a disapproval from congress, so he has a fall back and can perhaps make political capital on his blunder.
I’m hoping that was an attempt at comedy.
I never stated it was not to his political advantage to see Congressional approval. I’m assuming he sounded out the numbers before he went down this path to evaluate his chances. On the other hand, Steve wants it both ways. He wants Congress to approve and if it does so, he’s still not happy.
So if after a 45 minute walk he suddenly decided not to start WWIII immediately and talk to some morons in Congress about it, then the only option is to launch missiles?
He couldn’t talk to Russia, or the UN or Syria or Hans Blix and ask for their ideas?
I think Steve wants Congress to disapprove it. If they approve it, he will not be happy.
“On the other hand, Steve wants it both ways. He wants Congress to approve and if it does so, he’s still not happy.”
This is silliness. The clear reality is that Steve wants the following. (And I agree, I’d like this too.)
Preference 1: Based on the current information, Obama should STAY OUT OF IT. Both sides are evil; the issues at hand are none of his business; and he is manifestly in no position to judge or to enforce any laws or behavioral norms. If he refuses to stay out of it, we are unhappy with Obama, for the above-mentioned reasons. Moreover the whole affair is just a huge display of street theater in which both sides are Leninist and are just trying to lift our keys and wallets so they can take everything else we have.
Preference 2: If we can’t have Preference 1, then Obama should ask Congress for permission. When he refuses to do so or expresses frustration with such an idea, we’re unhappy with Obama. Because there’s no clear and imminent danger, the executive has no power to act unilaterally.
Preference 3: If Congress is asked, they should say NO, for the same reasons cited in Preferences 1 and 2. If they refuse to say no, we are unhappy with Congress.
Preference 4: Even before Congress had been asked, they should have convened and said NO anyway. Since they didn’t, we’re unhappy with them.
Preference 4: Having been asked, if Congress says no and Obama acts anyway, we will be happy with Congress and unhappy with Obama.
As far as if Obama had given us our Preference #1, we would still not be happy with him, because we know that he hates us and really just wants us either converted, enslaved, or dead. So in that sense you might say we want it both ways, i.e. we’re unhappy with him no matter what he decides vis-a-vis Syria. But speaking for myself, what I really want is for him to just resign and leave everyone alone. That’s not going to happen, but hypothetically if it did, it would make me much less unhappy with him.
P.s. The second “Preference 4” (which obviously s/b 5) should read “if Congress says no, Obama should not act. If he acts anyway, “
They are going to save the people by killing them. Democrat logic.
Yasser Arafat.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0XWjDuKJJQ
Guest Post: Is The US Going To War With Syria Over A Natural Gas Pipeline?
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-09-04/guest-post-us-going-war-syria-over-natural-gas-pipeline
Mike, good article, and it does support the premise of rummors I have heard that this is about support of the petro dollar, which is the basis of our affair with Saudi Arabia. “If the U.S. is successful in getting rid of the Assad regime, it will be good for either the Saudis or Qatar (and possibly for both), and it will be really bad for Russia.” However WWIII over the petro dollar is not a good deal. We will lose the US dollar as the international currency either way. (deservedly so) However developing inexpensive energy sources , independent of the volatile Middle East, is the only policy that makes sense either way.
Myopic politicians may kill us all.
Democrat problem solving skills LOL http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmhuQqPcOtY
Did I read somewhere about a desolation called “peace”?
Democrat Goverment in Action http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0bb_1378278361
I had a wife like that once.
You are mistaken in the biggest way!
This is about the destruction of the individual (& corporate) destruction and has nothing to do with anything going on in the world!
Environazis worried about the gold mine in the chicken, or something…
“When agents with the Alaska Environmental Crimes Task Force surged out of the wilderness around the remote community of Chicken wearing body armor and jackets emblazoned with POLICE in big, bold letters, local placer miners didn’t quite know what to think.
Did it really take eight armed men and a squad-size display of paramilitary force to check for dirty water? Some of the miners, who run small businesses, say they felt intimidated.
Others wonder if the actions of the agents put everyone at risk. When your family business involves collecting gold far from nowhere, unusual behavior can be taken as a sign someone might be trying to stage a robbery. How is a remote placer miner to know the people in the jackets saying POLICE really are police?
Miners suggest it might have been better all around if officials had just shown up at the door — as they used to do — and said they wanted to check the water.”
http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/20130903/gold-miners-near-chicken-cry-foul-over-heavy-handed-epa-raids