U.S. to Provide Military Assistance to Syrian Rebels

Typical, he ain’t.

I wouldn’t expect any other opinion from a die hard Zionist.

Looks that way doesn’t it?

I never mentioned America, that’s in your own mind. If fact I think in this case the US is a reluctant party in the imperialist coalition compared the the UK and France. The old Sykes-Pico imperialist alliance of the early 20th century. Anyway, your leap to defend the US even though I never mentioned it suggests you are very patriotic and own lots of flags, I thought you guys were supposed to be against Al Qaeda? The war on terror, remember? So really you should be supporting Assad who’s killed more terrorist jihadis in the past 2 years then the US in the past 100.

:slight_smile:

Well, it’s hard to see if you are being ironic, but at this point the conflict is better characterized as a civil war than an popular uprising, and a civil war in which one side is very much financed and controlled by the Gulf States and a large part of the fighting force is foreign.

Cameron really seems to be desperate now. Now he has given up whatever pretense he had to international law. The only thing is he has very little power to forgive. Al Qaeda is probably not taking orders from Cameron, not on matters of forgiveness either.

British P.M. Cameron to Syrian military: Toss Assad and we’ll give you amnesty

  • I also liked how Cameron was fuming and gnashing his teeth in the recent press meeting with Putin, when Putin said it was probably not the best idea to send money and weapons to people who cut open corpses and eat entrails.

Having run the KGB, he would know.

In KGB corpses eat you. But Putin was only a lowly clerk in the KGB. Later he rose to prominence in the FSB, which is the equivalent of the CIA. Wasn’t one of the Bush guys top man at the CIA?

Considering the way the Ba’ath party was crushed by Nasser under the ill-fated “United Arab Republic”(the Union between Egpyt and Syria forced by Nasser ostensibly to prevent Syria from a communist takeover) and how fervently a Ba’athist Assad, like his father is, and how much his father hated Nasser and having his country ruled by the foreign Nasser, I’m a bit surprised by people harsh reactions to Cmoore.

He was obviously joking since the Ba’athists are not Nasserists.

Hell, had anyone called Hafez Assad a “Nasserist” he’d have taken as much offense to it as being called “a Jew” or “a Zionist”(admittedly he’d see those words as interchangeable.

Indeed. He “looked him in the eye” and saw a kindred soul. :slight_smile:

I stand corrected, he was a mereLt. Colonel.

Yeah. I also always liked the younger Bush the better. CIA or no CIA, the older Bush was such a wimp. He only started one war. Bush the Younger started two. That’s twice as manly.

Hafez Assad and Bashar Al-Assad aren’t the same person. Ba’athism and Nasserism are very similar ideologies, the main break between them is the petty personal conflicts between some of their leading proponents, like between Hafez and some Nasserists. But Like I said Bashar is not Hafez and does not share the same squabblings. Assad supports both Ba’athism and Nasserism but the Nasser side is stronger in him.

And the motivation for NATO and “obsolute monarchies” to topple Assad is what, exactly?

You have a lot of dumb things to say about people with left wing politics.

Bush the elder did at least fly an aircraft in WWII, get shot down with his crew killed, was rescued by a US submarine and sixty years later throw up at the Japanese emperor’s dinner party.

They were both wealthy republican assholes and screwed up the American economy.

I think it’s pretty clear that his tongue was tucked pretty firmly in his cheek.

Beyond that, while I voted for Clinton over Bush, I really don’t think the recession was really his fault and probably would have happened under Dukakis just as the tech boom of the 90s probably would have still happened if he’d beaten Clinton.

There’s a tendency for Presidents to be blamed for all the problems that face the country, but often they aren’t.

Besides, Congress is the branch of government that passes laws and unlike either his son or Clinton, his party never controlled either branch of Congress during his Presidency.

I seriously doubt that the younger Bush is that intelligent.

Clinton left with a huge surplus; Bush left the country in debt and led it into a needless war, “Because he tried to kill my dad!”

I had no idea that you were a citizen of the United States, Ibn. :slight_smile:

So, you think that getting your crony friends rich while leaving the country treasury in debt is a sign of low intelligence?

Why can’t he be simply a very cunning and smart criminal who figured out the way to reach the highest degree of power and influence with the help of his friends who then, in return – as is the case with corrupt countries – cashed their cheques with 1000% interest?

Why is it so hard to admit that US Governmnet is simply corrupt and you live in a country where corruption is notorious in almost ever aspect of the Government?

I’ll eternally wonder how anyone can look at the ascent of Bush Jr. and his people into presidency of US and think of it as incompetence.

It may have been a master plan by Dick Cheney. :slight_smile:

Correct. Together with Rumsfeld and Bush sr.
This trio ran the country from Reagan’s presidency until 2008, with a Clinton interlude.

Don’t know why you put a smiley at the end.

Either laugh at the bastards, or cry. :wink:

Hahaha, Yes, .. everytime I see a disabled veteran from Iraq hobbling along on a pittance I laugh too..haha. :wink: