Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: U.S. Attacks Syria


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: U.S. Attacks Syria Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/11/2017 11:07:17 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire

Cruise missiles fly to low - if the American jackals fire 50, and even if half of them made their target, guffaws guffaws then what Russia has I doubt would even knock out one of those twenty five. Heh what happened to the other 25 Americashire Jackals guffaws some more.

Collateral damage, or (as they used to call it) dead civilians. Those poor Syrian babies Mister biovating bullshit bighands blobbypants was screeching about before he made the attack? Another nine of them are dead now.
(If he'd actually wanted to destroy the airstrip, did they not have fighter bombers on that ship he launched the missiles from?)
quote:

Does Syria have money? I thought it was just a pile of rubble that none of us can find on a a map, least of all the lying illiterate fuk


Syria might not have money, but Assad does. That's how democracy works in the middle east, after all: "I got the money so you better vote for me if you like breathing."

< Message edited by WhoreMods -- 4/11/2017 11:08:35 AM >

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 121
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/11/2017 4:57:29 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

Do you have to work at being this thick, or does it come to you naturally

Nothing about destroying an airfield and other things that are used to gas civilians, is inconsistent with the purpose of the United Nations

In fact, that is what they are supposed to do

Not at all. They are supposed to be acting in concert with UN Security Council Directives. No nation is allowed to act militarily against another except in self-defense. #51.

I misplaced you in Australia. So, worse, how can you be so ill-informed about the United Nations and its signature Members?

Your lack of knowledge and understanding of the modern world is becoming a burden on me. Please educate yourself.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 122
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/11/2017 5:19:58 PM   
BoscoX


Posts: 11238
Joined: 12/10/2016
Status: online 		If you weren't dumber than a lowly shit eating dog I might almost feel insulted by that post

_____________________________

Thought Criminal

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 123
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/11/2017 5:43:07 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		dogshit44 didnt post that, and you are dumber than he is, pedophile and shit eating decrepit withered compound gimp.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 124
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/11/2017 5:54:23 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
Back to Assad. Syria has not attacked any other country, therefore, we have no right to attack. We have no right to go there and try to depose the government, just like Venezuela, and a few other places. Like Nam, went and assassinated their President. If there is any international law this shit would be illegal.

They used illegal weapons that they had already been warned not to use. This isn't a declaration of war on Assad, this isn't a signal of US intent to colonize Syria and steal it away from Putin... it's a warning not to do it again.
What do you think would have happened if there had been no response?

Where does the US get the authority to warn them not to use illegal weapons in the first place?
quote:

quote:

The US needs to back off and stop with all this interference. It costs more than we got and makes enemies out of alot of people. If those morons don't learn this soon it will be the end of us.

What world are you living in? Do you think Putin is going to stop interfering in US elections, now that he knows that so long as it benefits the winner, he'll be able to get away with it? Oh wait, you're one of those people who thinks that as long as we curl into a little ball and pretend the rest of the world doesn't exist, nothing bad will happen.

Where does the authority come from allowing us to interject our will in the area?

The same exact place you get your personal authority to speak or to question or to act, or to right a wrong


That's not even close to being true. The US Government has limited powers and is supposed to be constrained by the US Constitution. As such, there is no authority granted within the US Constitution allowing for the US to act in Syria. Since Syria is not attacking a NATO country, and there hasn't been any authority granted by the UN, we have no authority to act.

You're either for the Constitution, or not for the Constitution. It's not a pick-and-choose thing.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 125
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/11/2017 6:10:48 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Where does the US get the authority to warn them not to use illegal weapons in the first place?

Where do the police get the authority to arrest you if you commit a crime?


From the governmental body that is organizing that police force (City, County, State, Federal, etc.). The thing is, We the People have set up our governmental system and levels so as to govern ourselves. As such, we have granted the authority to the government level to set up a police force for enforcing of the laws. Since the authority begins with the People, any authority NOT granted to a government is one that government does not have. Plus, We the People did not grant the authority to the Federal Government to defend the citizens of other countries from their own government. That simply is not in the US Constitution.

However, since we have entered into UN and NATO treaties, it's possible to derive the authority from those bodies, but there is no authority coming from NATO, since no NATO country has to be defended at this time, and the UN has not granted any authority for action to anyone.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Where does the authority come from allowing us to interject our will in the area?

I think the fact that so many of our allies have supported the move despite the tensions caused by Trump's election speaks volumes.


Would it have been okay for Russia to have bombed Alabama over the Tuskegee Syphilis experiments, if so many of it's allies supported the action?

The US has directly invaded a sovereign country (as opposed to the indirect invasion we've been on about with the funding and supporting of anti-Assad rebels). Any country that does that to the US would have war declared on them before the bodies were done being counted.

So many of our allies would support our getting rid of Kim Jon Un, but that doesn't make it right, authorized, or acceptable. So many of our allies would support our bombing of nuclear weapons facilities in Iran, but that doesn't make it right, authorized, or acceptable.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to heavyblinker)
Profile   Post #: 126
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/11/2017 7:07:13 PM   
Edwird


Posts: 3558
Joined: 5/2/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

So it begins. The Trump war(s).


This, from the guy who has been hysterically screaming that Russia owns Trump


This, from the guy who would have been all over HRC had she taken same action, because you got the hots for her so much you can't stand it, because she was in fact all in favor of this too (which is why so many stayed home), but now your boyfriend has just now woken up and done what the she-wolf would have, and you now are between the two in bed, and are now confuzzled as to whom you should give oral service to first.

You are a sad case.

(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 127
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/11/2017 7:42:53 PM   
Edwird


Posts: 3558
Joined: 5/2/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

You're either for the Constitution, or not for the Constitution. It's not a pick-and-choose thing.


Good gosh, at least read some history behind it.

The US Constitution was absolutely a 'pick and choose thing' at the outset. We wouldn't have had slavery otherwise. The Supreme Court, the US Congress, and various Presidents have made that plain.

But even before subsequent rulings and amendments and such, I sure as heck hope you are not arguing for rum running and slave running.

Making the Protestant Yankees come together among themselves on anything in the first place, and then the minimal Southern wealthy come to terms so as to evict the English 'governors' wasn't an easy task.

It was a document to get the job done at the time, that's all it was.

It was up to the SC judges and the congresses and presidents to straighten it all out later, in the case that we would actually win in that venture.

And a horrendous civil war.

Were it not for French antaginization to the British being concurrent, the 'empire' might have stomped our butt, no telling.


< Message edited by Edwird -- 4/11/2017 7:51:33 PM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 128
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/11/2017 8:08:44 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
You're either for the Constitution, or not for the Constitution. It's not a pick-and-choose thing.

Blah blah blah...

The US Constitution was absolutely a 'pick and choose thing' at the outset. We wouldn't have had slavery otherwise. The Supreme Court, the US Congress, and various Presidents have made that plain.

...Blah blah blah


Ah, yes, so, because the slave trade was allowed for a short period as a compromise to get the Southern States to ratify the Constitution, we can now pick and choose which parts of the Constitution we follow.

That's a vacuous argument, and surprising coming from you. My argument is that you can not rely on Constitutional Authority to get your way in one area and then ignore the lack of Constitutional Authority to get you way in another area. You either follow the Constitution, or you don't.

But, feel free to blather on about things that aren't really relevant so as to masturbate your ego.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Edwird)
Profile   Post #: 129
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/11/2017 8:42:03 PM   
Edwird


Posts: 3558
Joined: 5/2/2016
Status: offline 		Slave trade built many an expansive estate mansion in England and France and the Netherlands, and many a Barronancy and Lordship bestowed etc.as result, after they made laws against practice of slavery in their own immediate country, sorry you missed that one.

You can 'blah blah' all you want, but you have made it plain that you have no appreciation whatsoever of any history, nor that I actually pointed out that it took forever to get the Protestants to get it straightened out among themselves what it was to be about to begin with.

No matter how much you want to avoid it, this country started as result of disagreement on terms of whether the state (as in England) or the Protestant sect of whatever sort in Europe or the Colonies had rights to burn or drown 12 yr. old girls.

But fell free to blah blah blah about a document conjured for convenient purpose at the time, which I don't entirely disagree with, as having anything to do with today's world.

Falling back on a document that helped us win independence 240 yrs. ago in attempt to make a point against 'the government' in today's world of Google, Amazon, etc, is just plain silly.


< Message edited by Edwird -- 4/11/2017 8:55:32 PM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 130
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/11/2017 8:49:07 PM   
Edwird


Posts: 3558
Joined: 5/2/2016
Status: offline 		Not only cannot you keep up with history, you can't even keep up with today's world.

The French input to start of the US absolutely flew over your head, no surprise.



< Message edited by Edwird -- 4/11/2017 9:03:02 PM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 131
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/12/2017 5:30:08 AM   
BoscoX


Posts: 11238
Joined: 12/10/2016
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
You're either for the Constitution, or not for the Constitution. It's not a pick-and-choose thing.

Blah blah blah...

The US Constitution was absolutely a 'pick and choose thing' at the outset. We wouldn't have had slavery otherwise. The Supreme Court, the US Congress, and various Presidents have made that plain.

...Blah blah blah


Ah, yes, so, because the slave trade was allowed for a short period as a compromise to get the Southern States to ratify the Constitution, we can now pick and choose which parts of the Constitution we follow.

That's a vacuous argument, and surprising coming from you. My argument is that you can not rely on Constitutional Authority to get your way in one area and then ignore the lack of Constitutional Authority to get you way in another area. You either follow the Constitution, or you don't.

But, feel free to blather on about things that aren't really relevant so as to masturbate your ego.



I would take it further than that

Society is breaking down because "liberals" pick and choose what laws they want to respect, then they pretend outrage when their own standards are employed against them in return

With President Trump seating Supreme Court Justice Gorsuch being the latest and best example of this

_____________________________

Thought Criminal

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 132
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/12/2017 6:38:28 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird

Not only cannot you keep up with history, you can't even keep up with today's world.

The French input to start of the US absolutely flew over your head, no surprise.



Article 6 of the US Constitution binds our behavior to treaties made with "foreign" bodies such as the UN and NATO. This is not history; it is current. Trump acted beyond the limitations imposed by the UN Charter. I agree with DS.

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.



_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to Edwird)
Profile   Post #: 133
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/12/2017 7:04:37 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird
Slave trade built many an expansive estate mansion in England and France and the Netherlands, and many a Barronancy and Lordship bestowed etc.as result, after they made laws against practice of slavery in their own immediate country, sorry you missed that one.
You can 'blah blah' all you want, but you have made it plain that you have no appreciation whatsoever of any history, nor that I actually pointed out that it took forever to get the Protestants to get it straightened out among themselves what it was to be about to begin with.
No matter how much you want to avoid it, this country started as result of disagreement on terms of whether the state (as in England) or the Protestant sect of whatever sort in Europe or the Colonies had rights to burn or drown 12 yr. old girls.
But fell free to blah blah blah about a document conjured for convenient purpose at the time, which I don't entirely disagree with, as having anything to do with today's world.
Falling back on a document that helped us win independence 240 yrs. ago in attempt to make a point against 'the government' in today's world of Google, Amazon, etc, is just plain silly.


The history behind the US Constitution is immaterial, which is why most of what you're arguing is nothing more than blah blah blah. Do you think the US Constitution is a valid document by which the US Federal Government is bound? Does it's compromise beginnings make it a worthless document, regardless of time period?

Like it or not, we have a 240 year old Constitution that was ratified by the people in the States, forming our government. It has been amended as the majority of people in at least 3/4 of the States have seen fit. We don't get to pick and choose which parts we follow and those we don't.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Edwird)
Profile   Post #: 134
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/12/2017 7:08:23 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
You're either for the Constitution, or not for the Constitution. It's not a pick-and-choose thing.

Blah blah blah...
The US Constitution was absolutely a 'pick and choose thing' at the outset. We wouldn't have had slavery otherwise. The Supreme Court, the US Congress, and various Presidents have made that plain.
...Blah blah blah

Ah, yes, so, because the slave trade was allowed for a short period as a compromise to get the Southern States to ratify the Constitution, we can now pick and choose which parts of the Constitution we follow.
That's a vacuous argument, and surprising coming from you. My argument is that you can not rely on Constitutional Authority to get your way in one area and then ignore the lack of Constitutional Authority to get you way in another area. You either follow the Constitution, or you don't.
But, feel free to blather on about things that aren't really relevant so as to masturbate your ego.

I would take it further than that
Society is breaking down because "liberals" pick and choose what laws they want to respect, then they pretend outrage when their own standards are employed against them in return
With President Trump seating Supreme Court Justice Gorsuch being the latest and best example of this


I think you're missing my point, Bosco. This entire part of the thread happened because you're not following the Constitution. You can't have it both ways. Either you follow it, or you don't.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 135
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/12/2017 7:10:38 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
I agree with DS.


In other news, the 9th level of Hell has reached another record low.....



_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 136
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/12/2017 12:13:43 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
I agree with DS.


In other news, the 9th level of Hell has reached another record low.....



Hey, I respect your knowledge, DS, I just like poking sticks at your opinions

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 137
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/12/2017 12:52:25 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
You're either for the Constitution, or not for the Constitution. It's not a pick-and-choose thing.

Blah blah blah...

The US Constitution was absolutely a 'pick and choose thing' at the outset. We wouldn't have had slavery otherwise. The Supreme Court, the US Congress, and various Presidents have made that plain.

...Blah blah blah


Ah, yes, so, because the slave trade was allowed for a short period as a compromise to get the Southern States to ratify the Constitution, we can now pick and choose which parts of the Constitution we follow.

That's a vacuous argument, and surprising coming from you. My argument is that you can not rely on Constitutional Authority to get your way in one area and then ignore the lack of Constitutional Authority to get you way in another area. You either follow the Constitution, or you don't.

But, feel free to blather on about things that aren't really relevant so as to masturbate your ego.



I would take it further than that

Society is breaking down because "liberals" pick and choose what laws they want to respect, then they pretend outrage when their own standards are employed against them in return

With President Trump seating Supreme Court Justice Gorsuch being the latest and best example of this

Well if "their own standards are employed against them in return," then those who aren't liberals have also decided to "pick and choose what laws they want to respect, then they pretend outrage when their own standards are employed."

That's the pot saying to the kettle "Wait, I'm not black enough yet, OK, I'm as black as you, so here goes: 'You're a black kettle!'"

(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 138
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/12/2017 1:14:15 PM   
BoscoX


Posts: 11238
Joined: 12/10/2016
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
You're either for the Constitution, or not for the Constitution. It's not a pick-and-choose thing.

Blah blah blah...
The US Constitution was absolutely a 'pick and choose thing' at the outset. We wouldn't have had slavery otherwise. The Supreme Court, the US Congress, and various Presidents have made that plain.
...Blah blah blah

Ah, yes, so, because the slave trade was allowed for a short period as a compromise to get the Southern States to ratify the Constitution, we can now pick and choose which parts of the Constitution we follow.
That's a vacuous argument, and surprising coming from you. My argument is that you can not rely on Constitutional Authority to get your way in one area and then ignore the lack of Constitutional Authority to get you way in another area. You either follow the Constitution, or you don't.
But, feel free to blather on about things that aren't really relevant so as to masturbate your ego.


I would take it further than that

Society is breaking down because "liberals" pick and choose what laws they want to respect, then they pretend outrage when their own standards are employed against them in return

With President Trump seating Supreme Court Justice Gorsuch being the latest and best example of this


I think you're missing my point, Bosco. This entire part of the thread happened because you're not following the Constitution. You can't have it both ways. Either you follow it, or you don't.



When faced with a despicable enemy who recognizes no constitution, no law, and no rules, whose ideology is responsible for enslaving entire nations and the murder of over a hundred million civilians in the last century (Marxism), you do what is needed to win. You keep them out of power

Otherwise everyone loses

_____________________________

Thought Criminal

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 139
RE: U.S. Attacks Syria - 4/12/2017 1:22:59 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		What country would that be 'Marxism'? Never been tried in the worlds history.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 140
Page:   <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: U.S. Attacks Syria Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.141