Think Vietnam needs a big oooops also. Right up there with Iraq. History will show Iraq to be the single biggest blunder/lie America ever executed. The Gulf of Tonkin was a fabricated incident that gave the president authorization to commit troops to Vietnam, without approval from congress.
As far as McCain goes. Another example of everything that is wrong with our political system. Until we vote these worthless leaders out of office nothing will change.
He couldn't pay attention in a 3.5 hour hearing that included breaks. Then he joked about it. If he worked for me, he would of been fired.

Interesting how Obama wants to avenge the deaths of a bunch of Muslims in Syria, but not the death of Americans in Benghazi.

Amen.

Nominated for quote of the day.

How ironic it would be if we do the missile strikes, and with all the advanced notice the Syrians have had, to shuffle around, put in place human shields, how much collateral damage do you think there would be?? It would be a shame if we killed more than the original gas attacks...

I wonder how the admin would cope with that???

That's the lamestream media's job.

Reasons for entering a war are not always the same as the causes of wars.

In which case you should either stop identifying yourself as a Republican or claiming that you have an "interest" in history and then pointing to the "lessons" of the past.

In regards to the former, the GOP has made a priority out of promoting freedom abroad. If you're going to ignore that priority because you don't like the president or you don't like the people who might benefit in the short run from American intervention you're being inconsistent (at best).

In regards to the latter, if you're going to talk about the "lessons" of history (which you often do), but then ignore the "lessons" of taking a head in the sand approach to regional conflicts in the era of modern warfare you're being intellectually inconsistent (at best).

Hence why I wrote 'reason for entering' and not 'cause of'

Causes are usually blurry and lost in the outcome as the winner gets to write the history books.

Sometimes the reason is the cause and the cause the reason.

My list was to show how "noble causes", have given way to "junk science".

The GOP and I think even most Democrats think freedom is a honorable reason to go to war.. The problem in many of the current regional conflicts is neither side is espousing freedom.

SO, The next reason, is it in the USA vested interested to interfere, for what ever reason.

Take the case of Kony, freedom will carry the reason, because they sure don't have anything else we need. Is his opposition not as bad?, or may be better?. Who knows. Yet we have done very little out side of the UN mandates to step on that bug.

There are probably over a dozen regional conflicts in Africa alone. In most cases there is no good guys vs bad guys. They are all bad guys and the "vested interest" thing,, it doesn't hold sand.

Syria is one of the areas that does not have history of freedom, nor a history of good guys..

Are we being intellectually inconsistent??
Or maybe we are politically motivated inconsistently??

For what ever reason,, I do not see any reason to do anything for or against that area.

My $00.00002.. :munchin

Freedom? The proposed actions by our government are not promoting freedom for anyone--no matter what bullshit passes from our politicians lips.

Amen

If it happens. We will send a few million dollar cruise missiles into a mountain side, empty buildings and throw in one of Assads Palaces for fun. My guess is we are going to do nothing.
People don't realize how dangerous it is for a president to show weakness like Obama has done. I can't think of any political disaster that even comes close to this. Well maybe Lincoln and Kennedy:D
Thats why Putin came out and did his press conference with in an hour of Obama;s back down speech. It's a dog pile domestic and foreign. If this was his last year it wouldn't matter to much. But we still have three FU@#$ing years of this.

More Syria Comics
 

.

It makes absolutely no sense for Assad to use chemical weapons. He has the rebels backed in a corner. He was about to launch an offensive to crush them even more. An offensive that's been put on hold because of this situation. He knew using chemical weapons would bring the U.S into the fight. Even if he was loosing it's not like chemical weapons give you some great tactical advantage, They hinder your own troops greatly. They actually suck as a weapon. It's a dirty weapon that bogs down both sides. The military in general hates the thought of using them.

Interesting perspective. 3 1/2 min.

David Brooks: Obama's Decision To Go To Congress "Very Unfortunate"

So what happens if the "O"man doesn't get Congressional approval. Does he still have the authority to strike?