So it all comes down to the fact that Obama 'reckons' Assad did it.

[last1standing]

It turns out the "irrefutable proof" now means "common sense" and this is the argument Obama is using in yet another attempt to gain support for killing men, women, (and yes) children in Syria.

Let's just be clear, you can use common sense to know that a cat with milk on her nose has been into your cereal bowl. You can use common sense to know that your teen-ager who smells of booze has been drinking. You CANNOT use common sense as an excuse to murder people. It doesn't work that way.

Using common sense as an reason to kill is called vigilante justice. It is not rule of law, it is rule without law and that is what Obama is now proposing.

Will we be a nation that requires facts and evidence before going to war or will we just reckon our adversaries deserved it anyway?

[VanillaRhapsody]

1. who is trying to murder people?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23946071

http://defensetech.org/2013/08/30/air-force-developed-bombs-capable-of-destroying-syrias-chemical-weapons/

[last1standing]

9. Did you not read the part about "proximity to civilians?"

If Obama strikes Syria on a hunch he will be responsible for the murder of men, women and children. I stand by that statement.

[VanillaRhapsody]

20. So nothing can ever happen if there is a chance that someone dies?

you cannot argue the nuances of this with a total pacifist.

[last1standing]

23. And you can't argue reason with the blood-thirsty.

n/t

[VanillaRhapsody]

24. Who says I am blood thirsty?

blood thirsty because I care that children were gassed in their beds? That I want to see those chemicals removed from the face of the planet? If that makes me "bloodthirsty" by your estimate then so be it. I stand by my convictions..

We are 78% of the way there from removing them completely....can you name anything else horrid we have tried to remove from the planet with a 78% success (so far...when we finish eliminating ours by 2017 that number will be much higher)?

[last1standing]

37. Who says I'm a pacifist?

If you want to start throwing around names and making false claims expect to get them back in return.

[VanillaRhapsody]

38. apparently so..."if even one person dies" it is not a worthwhile effort

sounds pretty pacifistic to me...

[last1standing]

74. Since you're quoting something I didn't write, I'll assume you have no real argument.

Many would call what you're doing "lying," but not me. I call it making up truths with no facts.

[VanillaRhapsody]

90. Okay then I'll play along with your game...

How many would you allow then...since you are balking at one.....how many then?

[last1standing]

92. That's the difference between us. I don't see this as a game.

n/t

[VanillaRhapsody]

93. Oh YES you do...

You try to ask questions of me....that you think will "get me" to back into some "analysis" you have of my response that you expect.

But when I turn the tables on YOU and ask you the exact same kind of question....weeeeeeellllll doggie...I am just not being reasonable!

HA! You aren't playing games....My Aunt Fanny!

[last1standing]

96. Again, you don't have an argument so you make up shit to argue with.

How pathetic is that?

[VanillaRhapsody]

98. Just responding to your little rants about "what I am doing"...

but "please continue"....

[last1standing]

99. LOL! Did you really type that out thinking no one could glance up to see the rest of this thread?

Seriously?

I'd explain why your comment is so funny but you'd either still not understand or slink off without admitting how embarrassing your posts are.

[VanillaRhapsody]

100. yeah...right....

but yet....here you are...still flapping yer trap...not smart enough to know when to slink off apparently....

[last1standing]

101. And now you're just parroting what I said.

Take a few minutes, maybe read some other posts, find a jab that didn't come from the post directly above and try again.

[VanillaRhapsody]

102. If I am not making sense to you....then I must be hurting your widdle feelings...

or you are deeply attracted to me....cause you seem to be saying you are my superior....yet here you are...still trying to get just one more jab in so you don't have leave feeling like you got pawned! Superior my Aunt Fanny!

[last1standing]

103. Yeah, you really should have taken the time I suggested. Copying my post again is sad.

But I do have to get to bed so I'll just leave you with your fantasies about strangers on the intertubes being wildly attracted to blood thirsty chickenhawks who can't manage to come up with an original comment.

Enjoy what we both know you're about to do.

[VanillaRhapsody]

104. or something.....you keep trying ya hear?

Maybe next time...

[morningfog]

27. How would you feel if you knew 500 would die in US strikes?

A thousand?

Ten thousand?

[VanillaRhapsody]

28. In an effort to eliminate Sarin gas....so it cannot fall into the wrong hands?

There I fixed it for ya...you left that part out.

[cherokeeprogressive]

31. You may have "fixed" it, but you certainly didn't answer it.

Want to try answering it now?

[VanillaRhapsody]

40. Just because you don't like the answer you got...doesn't mean it wasnt answered.

[cherokeeprogressive]

45. I am stating a FACT right here and now that you DID NOT answer the question you claimed to "fix".

[DisgustipatedinCA]

91. This is his modus operandi.

But it was fun to embarrass him when he decided to play pro-NSA tech expert. He's a clueless supporter of war and authoritarianism.

[morningfog]

46. You didn't give an answer.

How would you feel if you knew that 500 would die in US strikes in an effort to eliminate Sarin gas?

A thousand?

Ten thousand?

[morningfog]

34. Okay. And the answer?

How would you feel if you knew that 500 would die in US strikes in an effort to eliminate Sarin gas?

A thousand?

Ten thousand?

[VanillaRhapsody]

41. How many will you allow to die from Sarin gas before you do something about it...

apparently 1500 is too low...

[morningfog]

44. Dodge number two.

I'll answer you, but you should answer me. You look like you are trying to avoid an uncomfortable question.

I have seen enough that I support taking action now. I support the UN inspectors gathering all the evidence and presenting it. I support further efforts to locate and secure/destroy chemical weapons through UN weapons inspectors. I support diplomatic efforts to end the civil war.

Now, how would you feel if you knew that 500 would die in US strikes in an effort to eliminate Sarin gas?

A thousand?

Ten thousand?

[morningfog]

60. How would you feel if you knew that 500 would die in US strikes in an effort to eliminate Sarin gas?

how would you feel if you knew that 500 would die in US strikes in an effort to eliminate Sarin gas?

A thousand?

Ten thousand?

[morningfog]

70. How would you feel if you knew that 500 would die in US strikes in an effort to eliminate Sarin gas?

how would you feel if you knew that 500 would die in US strikes in an effort to eliminate Sarin gas?

A thousand?

Ten thousand?

[truedelphi]

105. Unfortunately appealing to logic and

Trying to get people to use their minds and look at consequences when the Powers that Be have them all worked up emotionally has never been a winning tactic.

Just as "patriotism" is seen as supporting fervently the Powers that Be as they lunge the country into war - while wanting peace, and a secure middle class and decent schools and needed expenditures on the infra structure is seen as being in league with the evil or Commies or socialists or something. When the later is far more patriotic than the former.

[Iggo]

42. He'll never answer.

[VanillaRhapsody]

43. He is a she...and I answered...How many?

[Iggo]

49. How many?

[VanillaRhapsody]

51. How many would have to die of Sarin for you to react?

apparently 1400 is not enough

[sibelian]

95. How many children killed in the name of RIDDING the world of sarin will it take before YOU react?

what is this insane switch in your head that calculates killing people by means other than sarin in the cause of ridding the world of sarin is somehow less ugly than sarin?

[VanillaRhapsody]

97. You are not thinking this thing through...

How much Sarin are we going to allow from now on? How many people are you going to overlook it on? How many get a pass? How much WMD is okay in your book? You know weapons that 98% of the world agreed to eliminate together. (Do you know how rare it is to get the world to agree 98% to disarm? That's how big a deal that is). How much is okay to "let pass"? Inquiring dictators and tyrants want to know...

[Dragonfli]

82. I counted, you answered exactly (pulls out calculator) ... 0 times!

Death cheerleaders are the cutest cheerleaders around!



You look really good in that picture, remember your chant!!

War is good!
War is great!
Let's kill some folks
and masturbate!!!!

yeeeeeeehhhhhh!!!!!

[Iggo]

54. Lol...see what I mean?

[morningfog]

64. It's kind of hilarious. Almost like talking to a machine that spits

out random phrases.

[Iggo]

67. Yup.

[Dragonfli]

71. It is funny at first, then you grow tired after about twenty posts of nonsense

Trust me on this, I actually made a prolonged effort to communicate and now wish I hadn't.
This poster refuses to even believe there are any punitive plans, only a scheme to use secret weapons that will miraculously destroy all the sarin with no boots on the ground and very limited "but well worth it!!!" deaths near the explosions.

[JackRiddler]

89. Why is it the U.S. job to unilaterally bomb Syria?

This has nothing to do with pacifism.

Pacifism would be if Syria attacked the U.S. and we were against striking back.

What we have here is whether the U.S.G. should -unilaterally- intervene in Syria, and do so against the protests of 180+ other nations who oppose this action.

On the other side of the planet.

After 13 years of continuous war.

Why isn't this Brazil's job?

Or Japan's?

Why is the U.S.G. the sole judge of what must be done?

[treestar]

30. That definition of murder is not accepted

by most of societies in most of the world for most of its history.

Is Assad not a murderer?

[Dragonfli]

73. I would have said yes, but according to you the definition does not fit...

[treestar]

80. Assad is guilty of murder

Obama would not be. You really can't see the difference there?

[Dragonfli]

83. willfully causing the death of hundreds if not thousands of civilians? errr not really. /nt

[last1standing]

79. Yes, Assad is a murderer. Does that excuse Obama becoming one as well?

I hope that is not what you are trying to argue.

[treestar]

81. No it is you saying that murderers should get away with it

And be left alone by the rest of the world.

[Dragonfli]

84. Why not proactively cause the deaths of thousands more! That'll help. That'll teach em what for!

Death cheerleader always come off a little creepy, you know that right?

Don'y forget your chant

War is good!
War is great!
Let's kill some folks
And masturbate!!!!!!
Yeeeeeeaaaaaayyy!!!!!

It is also so much fun to view your glorious death from TV without getting your own delicate beautiful minds and velvet soft hands dirty with the blood you call for.
You chicken hawks that refuse to fight the wars you cheer for are so very brave.
The PNAC solutes you in your efforts

[last1standing]

85. Since I never said that, you must not have a real argument.

Many would call what you posted a lie but I'll just call it truthiness.

[morningfog]

26. Dude, that's a pipe dream. We're going in with Cruise missiles and bombs.

[VanillaRhapsody]

47. Even Popular Mechanics has a great article on it...

"The Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) has provided the Pentagon with scientific, technical, and operational support against all types of weapons of mass destruction since 1998. This includes finding means of destroying WMD before they can be deployed. The agency’s most famous product might be the Massive Ordnance Penetrator, a 30,000-pound bunker buster. But the DTRA also has built subtler technology that could be deployed against chemical agents.

Specialized weapons are needed for the task because conventional explosives create a risk of dispersing the agents though the blast and heat of an explosion. The plume that appears after a bomb detonation shows how high debris can rise—and from that altitude it can travel downwind for many miles. This creates a lethal threat to large numbers of civilians.

One approach to get around this problem is to build a bomb with no explosives—one that’s simply intended to puncture storage containers. The CBU-107 Passive Attack Weapon is a 1000-pound bomb that breaks open in the air to produce a shower of 3700 steel and tungsten darts ranging in size from an ounce to a pound, which hammer an area two hundred feet wide. This might seem like a poor solution, since the chemical agents still release into the air. But many chemical agents are heavier than air and won’t travel far if released at ground level. Plus, the action of sunlight and air will degrade them. "

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/weapons/how-the-us-could-take-out-syrias-chemical-weapons-14826307

[morningfog]

52. Do you read what you post?

The major caveat: Even if these kinds of weapons work exactly as planned, knocking out Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles is not just a weapons engineering challenge. Intelligence is key and, as the war in Iraq showed, pinning down WMD is notoriously difficult. It’s no use taking out a warehouse with the latest hardware if the chemicals were never there, or if they were moved out the previous day. And any action on a stockpile is hazardous. Anything less than 100 percent destruction risks exposing innocent civilians to lethal chemical agents. Agent defeat weapons might offer some options in an unstable and dangerous situation in Syria, but they are certainly not an easy, risk-free solution.

[VanillaRhapsody]

53. Yes I do....do you?

because what is discussed there is ONLY what is known...it says right out...that the most sophisticated plans are secret....thats all that we know about...

[cherokeeprogressive]

56. His chemical weapons are most likely now stored in close proximity to civilian population centers.

[VanillaRhapsody]

58. thats you guessing....

do you realize how foolish that would be? You cannot even get close to the stuff...the doctors helping the patients got sick from it even...

[morningfog]

61. Not when it is stored or contained. You should read some more popular mechanics articles.

How do you think they manufacture and store the chemicals?

[VanillaRhapsody]

65. that would be stupid...like there would never be a spill and deaths bringing international attention

Like we have now? I think not...lots of people being around areas where it is stored makes it all the more likely that something could go wrong..

Or are you going to say he is moving it around? Yeah that would be safe....

[morningfog]

66. The chemicals aren't released until they are detonated.

They aren't radioactive. It isn't like the chemicals can't be transported. I don't think you understand the concept. Which makes realize you have no credibility on your magic foam bomb.

[VanillaRhapsody]

69. they are still chemicals! Seriously dangerous chemicals

what do you think they are mixing bleach and ammonia here?

[morningfog]

57. This has nothing to do with sophistication.

The major caveat: Even if these kinds of weapons work exactly as planned, knocking out Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles is not just a weapons engineering challenge. Intelligence is key and, as the war in Iraq showed, pinning down WMD is notoriously difficult. It’s no use taking out a warehouse with the latest hardware if the chemicals were never there, or if they were moved out the previous day. And any action on a stockpile is hazardous. Anything less than 100 percent destruction risks exposing innocent civilians to lethal chemical agents. Agent defeat weapons might offer some options in an unstable and dangerous situation in Syria, but they are certainly not an easy, risk-free solution.

[VanillaRhapsody]

55. and remember when I mentioned foam

Another proposed agent-defeat weapon combines a thermite mixture, such as powdered iron oxide and aluminum with a foaming agent. When triggered, this produces molten metallic foam that smothers the chemical storage area. The foam then undergoes a reaction producing temperatures of 2000 degrees F, neutralizing any chemicals. This technique was patented in 2010, which suggests development is continuing.


http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/weapons/how-the-us-could-take-out-syrias-chemical-weapons-14826307

[morningfog]

59. Have you heard that the plan is to use Cruise missiles?

Not your fantasy foam heat bomb?

Get real.

[VanillaRhapsody]

62. You have no idea what is planned do you?

but I sure as hell been educating you about what is possible...

and all these folks telling me this isn't possible when freaking patents have been taken out on them...

[morningfog]

63. Patents don't mean (1) that they work, (2) that they would work in Syria, (3) that

we have a clue where they are, (4) that we can hit them with precision, (5) ah fuck it, you are out to lunch.

[VanillaRhapsody]

68. And check this article about the technology back in 1999!

We have been doing this a LONG time...

Tender Bombs?
U . S . Military Mulls
Weapons That Disable
Bunkers, Spare People
---
Bleach, Foam, Ozone Get
A Look-Over; Creating
That Sticky Situation

http://www.pulitzer.org/archives/6368

Sorry to disappoint you....but technology is your friend.

[Savannahmann]

35. I noticed you keep on with the miracle bomb link

The one that is going to neutralize the CW by something just a hair short of magic. Here is the dirty little secret. It's never been tested. It should work in theory, if they can get a pinpoint hit on the canister, which means for missiles and artillery rounds a hit within an inch or two. If they miss by a couple inches, they will release the CW they are trying to destroy.

Are you willing to bet the lives of dozens, perhaps hundreds of innocents downwind on that kind of accuracy requirement? If we release the chemicals instead of destroying them, if the theory doesn't work out, will we turn ourselves into the Hague for committing the same war crime we blame Assad for?

[VanillaRhapsody]

50. It's no miracle...its technology...

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/weapons/how-the-us-could-take-out-syrias-chemical-weapons-14826307

The best defense is to destroy the chemical agents as rapidly as possible, and this is the thinking behind the BLU-119/B CrashPAD bomb developed in 2004. PAD stands for Prompt Agent Defeat. Like the CBU-107, CrashPAD throws out shrapnel to pierce chemical storage containers. But this weapon also carries a main payload of more than 400 pounds of white phosphorus, which burns at a high temperature and rapidly breaks down chemical agents. In 2007, the DTRA also developed a penetrating version called Shredder to attack chemical stockpiles in underground bunkers.

The Pentagon has been secretive about the projects that have been in development since then. But from unclassified documents we know that newer weapons are likely to be more sophisticated. The latest DTRA R&D budget mentions funding for new "payloads capable of neutralizing large amounts of WMD agent." Candidates include intermetallic reactions, novel types of thermite (metal reacting with metal oxide with pyrotechnic consequences), new energetic nanomaterials, and thermobaric materials—fuel-rich explosives that react with oxygen in the air and produce high temperatures.

[Savannahmann]

72. It is still theoretical.

Because it can't be tested. It can't be tested because its illegal to destroy chemical weapons in that way in this country.

Secondly. Let's say there are 100 locations where Chemical Weapons are stored. It is probable that there are, because we have seen reports that Assad is shifting them around. Now, we don't have enough B-2's to hit that many targets, but since we're pretending this theoretical technology is foolproof, we will let that go. 100 targets with pinpoint accuracy. Not one near miss. Not one fail to function anywhere. That sort of perfection is beyond our capability. It took tens of thousands of engineers, technicians, and workers to approach that level of perfection at NASA and we still made mistakes including but not limited to Apollo 1, Apollo 13, Challenger, Columbia, Hubble, and my favorite, Gemeni 1 where we forgot to factor in that the Earth rotated.

Syria isn't going to be a cakewalk. Also, your forgot my last question. What happens if we release the CW into the population? Are we then committing the war crime we object to so strongly?

[David__77]

2. It's the trial balloon for "there's no there there."

It's coming. And they don't want a discussion about what think is "minutia." They only want to debate what is in essence a hypothetical situation in the broadest terms possible.

[NightWatcher]

3. His Magic 8 Ball said "all signs point to yes"

So there's that.

[gristy]

4. what?

There seems to be an unstated reference here. Could you provide a quote and link for us?

Thanks!

[woo me with science]

5. Here you go.

Who needs evidence to BOMB people, when we have a Decider?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023624242

[gristy]

6. yikes

Thanks for the link.

[woo me with science]

22. It's impossible to keep up with

the horrible.

[last1standing]

8. Thanks woo.

I stepped out to grill dinner so wasn't able to respond in time.

[woo me with science]

21. My pleasure.

[Catherina]

75. Appalling n/t

[Dragonfli]

7. Proofiness©! HaHa! I finally beat Colbert to the finish line on cool new words! /nt

[reformist2]

13. LOL!

[LaydeeBug]

14. LOL. That was awesome. nt

[Jackpine Radical]

10. Is this what they mean by "Dead Reckoning?"

[DeSwiss]

11. Maybe he should have called Colin.....

...because he knows how to get the crowd on your side when it comes to warring.



- K&R

[last1standing]

12. I remember threads on DU supporting IWR after Powell addressed the UN.

Powell had the stature and admiration of both Democrats and republicans before we all found out how many lies he told during that speech. Afterward, its hard to believe he could get elected dogcatcher.

You would have thought Kerry a smart enough man to learn from that.

[DeSwiss]

15. I was never one of them.

- In his official report as the boots-on-the-ground officer investigating the Mai Lai Massacre, Major Colin Powell stated: "In war, these sorts of terrible things happen now and again."

[last1standing]

16. That was pointed out at the time.

Unfortunately, many didn't want to know about Mai Lai.

[treestar]

32. So wait, it seems you are saying

that every report of wrongdoing in the world is a lie.

Things are really peaceful and happy in Syria right now.

[bhikkhu]

17. As does France, Germany and Britain, and probably the Un when their report comes out

I suppose it depends on how much evidence you want to see before you come to a conclusion, though of course there is no actual necessity of ever coming to a conclusion. If you weren't there, "proof" is always something that is in doubt.

[last1standing]

18. Britain is going to attack Syria?

Thanks for letting me know. I could have sworn Parliament nixed Cameron's Syria adventure.

[bhikkhu]

19. No, but they concluded that Assad was responsible for the chemical attacks

I'm fairly convinced by the evidence I've heard myself, but I'm not a supporter of any broad military action, and I wouldn't be upset by a "no" vote from congress.

On the other hand, if there is a specific and limited way to degrade the Syrian military's ability to use chemical weapons, and congress approves it, then I'd probably be in support.

[daleo]

25. Their parliament concluded they wouldn't support Britain going to war

That's what counts.

[bhikkhu]

48. Then we can move on from "Assad did it" to what we should do in response

or what we shouldn't do. I disagree that to argue against intervention in Syria, one has to exonerate Assad from his apparent ineptitude and/or crimes.

[last1standing]

77. No we can't. Just because Cameron decided Assad did it doesn't make it fact.

There was a time when most of us agreed that Tories were not to be trusted with war propaganda.

[treestar]

29. So how to decide?

Jury Trial?

[L0oniX]

33. "reckons" ??? Beverly Hillbilly talk?

[CountAllVotes]

36. reckin?

I reckin so!

[L0oniX]

39. Nawt an nawt an double nawt bomb em.

[bowens43]

76. even wirth absolute proof, the US has NO RIGHT to attack Syria.

If the president orders US forces to participate in an attack on Syria then he will be a war criminal and should be prosecuted as such.

[last1standing]

78. Agreed, but not having facts makes it even worse.

n/t

[LibAsHell]

94. Thank you. A point that many people are missing

Even if we had ironclad proof that Assad was responsible, it's not a reason to engage Syria militarily.

For fuck's sake, we are planning on bombing an already war-ravaged country and then praying it allows the rebels to not only take back control of key areas, but overthrow Assad AND succeed in instituting an interim government that represents all involved parties. All while inevitably killing civilians. That is NOT a fucking plan we should get behind.

[cui bono]

86. Where/when did he say "common sense"? n/t

[last1standing]

87. Here.

“The common-sense test says he is responsible for this. He should be held to account,” McDonough said of the Syrian leader who for two years has resisted calls from inside and outside his country to step down.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-working-to-rally-lawmakers-american-public-behind-obamas-push-for-syrian-strike/2013/09/08/66cfb932-1868-11e3-80ac-96205cacb45a_story.html

[cui bono]

109. Thanks. n/t

[truedelphi]

106. Herer's an a rticle that refers to the "common sense" aspect of the matter:

Last edited Mon Sep 9, 2013, 04:07 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.theday.com/article/20130909/NWS14/309099956/1044

But Obama's chief of staff cites 'common sense' test

Washington - The White House asserted Sunday that a "common-sense test" dictates the Syrian government is responsible for a chemical weapons attack that President Barack Obama says demands a U.S. military response. But Obama's top aide says the administration lacks "irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence" that skeptical Americans, including lawmakers who will start voting on military action this week, are seeking.

"This is not a court of law. And intelligence does not work that way," White House chief of staff Denis McDonough said during his five-network public relations blitz Sunday to build support for limited strikes against Syrian President Bashar Assad.

"The common-sense test says he is responsible for this. He should be held to account," McDonough said of the Syrian leader who for two years has resisted calls from inside and outside his country to step down.

[font color=red]Text above was all from the article.[/font /color=red]

[cui bono]

108. Thanks. n/t

[Common Sense Party]

88. "Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don’t know about that decision."

Joe Biden warned of this day. Were we listening? Did we forget?

He said it would happen in the first 6 months--he meant first 6 years.

Gird up your loins.
A generated, international crisis to test Obama's mettle.
He's gonna need us.
Need our help.
To stand with him.
Initially, it won't be apparent that we're right.
Obama will clean the Augean stables.
We'll be asking 'why is this thing so tough?
Why are they down in the polls?'
They'll have to make the tough decisions.
"Remember the faith you had at this point because you’re going to have to reinforce us."

Remember?

Prophetic?

Pathetic?

You decide.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/10/biden-to-suppor/

[truedelphi]

112. This sounds so Nxonian -

That although the nation could choose an easy course, (My reply, which would guarantee a decent middle income classed economy, money for superfluous items lime schools and health and safety) we are not a nation of shirkers and we will choose to do difficult things."


So the result of choosing the difficult Nixonian/Kissinger strategy for Vietnam and the US was this one:
1) six million dead, wounded or homeless Vietnamese, with a legacy of cancer and birth defects from the chemical weaponry called Agent Orange, that plagues that nation to this day. Plus 50,000 dead American service people, and another 10,000 that committed suicide within 15 years of returning home
2) At last 20 billions of dollars to pay for the war and make everyone who headed firms like Raytheon and Dow Chemical rich rich rich. (Although 20 billion wouldn't even get 100 rockets out of their wrappers and onto jet fighters in this day and age, which is why our wars cost trillions now.)

But at lest when we fought in Vietnam we were not doing it as mercenaries for Saudi nations and Israel.

[Cronus Protagonist]

107. PNAC

All else is propaganda or circumstantial. The powers are following the PNAC plan. They're already into it for several billion dollars - in for a penny, in for a pound. And there's billions of dollars to be made.

[jpak]

110. Assad did it.

period

yup

[last1standing]

111. Ya reckon?

n/t