Posted by: ffman Dec 10 2012, 03:02 PM
This site needs more activity - even if it is political bickering.
Reports are that Syria has chemical weapons armed and ready to use, but will they use them? Should the US go in?
Posted by: redwing40 Dec 10 2012, 06:19 PM
I agree on that!
I see trouble coming for Obama in the next four years, how will he handle whats about to happen over-sea's! better be careful with Russia and China on Syria's side, and with the US looking weak financially, better just leave this one alone if something happens!
Posted by: Zimbow Dec 11 2012, 06:53 PM
United States better stay out of it. Too much to work on here in the states.
Posted by: ffman Dec 12 2012, 05:07 PM
QUOTE(Zimbow @ Dec 11 2012, 05:53 PM)
United States better stay out of it. Too much to work on here in the states.
I feel that for better or for worse, we will eventually have to get involved. One of my main concerns is this: our government has already labeled some of the Syrian rebels as terrorists.
Posted by: Zimbow Dec 12 2012, 08:31 PM
What's wrong with letting the UN deal with it? United States can't always play world police. We just have to know when to stay out of things.
Posted by: northicehero99 Dec 13 2012, 11:56 AM
QUOTE(Zimbow @ Dec 12 2012, 08:31 PM)
What's wrong with letting the UN deal with it? United States can't always play world police. We just have to know when to stay out of things.
I agree with this. We need to focus on getting congress, senate, and the president to put their political labels in the closet and throw on hard-hats and resolve our own issues here!
Posted by: dviv17 Dec 22 2012, 10:18 PM
'Twill be interesting to see how the White House, with the new addition of Kerry, moves forward on this issue during Obama's second term.
Posted by: ffman Dec 23 2012, 12:12 PM
QUOTE(dviv17 @ Dec 22 2012, 09:18 PM)
'Twill be interesting to see how the White House, with the new addition of Kerry, moves forward on this issue during Obama's second term.
And who are you?
Long time no see! How is life treating you?