What do make of the fact that one of the few pols who had the cojanes to oppose Iraq has suddenly dropped his gyro?
Why would the leading antiwar spokesperson, just returned from Vietnam, have spoken out against the war?
Why did George McGovern, leading antiwar pol, become the single voice in the entire Congress to speak out about the genocide in Cambodia?
Have all these folks drunk Rumsfeld kool-aid? Maybe they actually know what they're doing?
CarolO - 11 years ago
I hope not!!!!! I am tired of our money going to countries who do not even us.
Dallas Schwartz - 11 years ago
Ed; First I will admit I am a STAUNCH Conservative. On many things I do not agree with you, but this time we are in full agreement. The President is dead wrong on his stance of a Need to strike Syria. Do I think that Syrian leadership is being wrongfully accused? No. But if the President forces the hand and uses military action against Syria; needs to be met with a call for Impeachment for failing to acknowledge the voice & will of the U.S. people.
I certainly hope that you and your friends on the Democrat side of the aisle are somehow able to reign in the President and prevent what very well may be the start of WWIII as we the U.S. would NOT be on the side of the international community this time. We would in fact be the ones everyone would be coming for. Then again, that would certainly meet the end sought by the Muslim Brotherhood wouldn't it? Is that what this is really ALL about with Syria? The MB has stated their ultimate goal is the undoing of the Constitution & demise of the U.S. With the President being so in their camp & alleged to be a member of the MB it is also a question that needs to be part of the discussion. I know you may say that my latter comments are that of an O'Bamma hater; no, just a very concerned veteran (USMC) & citizen.
The President said it best in Sweden today, he is not the one that drew a red line, we did long ago when we decided that we could not tolerate the slaughtering of innocent civilians at the hands of evil leadership. The United States sets the example of morality.
Gene Gascon - 11 years ago
What? Another distraction from rebuilding OUR economy?! Mid-East countries need to step-up in the peace process now.
James J. Fox - 11 years ago
Ask the Corporate OWNERS, Controllers, and Commanders of the Politicians that are in
"The ReNAZIpublican Party, Inc.", perhaps they will tell you. Now FOLLOW the commands given to YOU by FAUX NOISE, (where all the news is "Fairly Unbalanced", and be OBEDIANT Corporate OWNED SLAVES like EVERY SINGLE Politician in "The ReNAZIpublican Party, Inc." are FCSCOL!
J.J.J.V.F.
L. O'Brien - 11 years ago
Why is it ALWAYS our country that has to intervene in another's problems? My heart breaks for the many who have died in Syria, BUT...we have so many problems here at home. I cannot get any job, for over a year, and they want to cut off unemployment benefits; yet, there are (somehow) resources to fund a military campaign in other countries! And, by the way, my son served two tours of duty in Afghanistan. He came home. Many did not. Please, enough! This country needs some serious help. That is where the focus should be.
Sarita - 11 years ago
While I realize we cannot sit back and do nothing, we must find a way to Publicly & Financially get international support and address the situation as an international unit, not as an action of the U.S... for retaliation will be our demise.
James Wald - 11 years ago
I feel sorry for the Syrians, but we aren't the only country in this world, where is the United Nations? They haven't done anything for years, we must pick our congress from those countries. The United Nations is just a name, if we were smart we would pull out of the U.N. and take care of our own. Civil war is a mess, and we don't need to stick our noses in, let them fight their own battles. Who would help us if our Gov't. started pushing their citizens around, the answer id NO BODY. There is enough Middle East countries to pitch in and help Syria, if they wanted to. For what it is worth GET THE HELL OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST. James
Lydia Barreiros - 11 years ago
Deep in my heart, I don't believe the President wants military action and is counting on the house to say no because they say no to everything he wants.
International humanitarian aid and diplomacy are the only solutions we should consider.
NO BOMBINGS NO KILLING NO WAR.
ps @Dafna your calling Barack Obama a pos only confirms your ignorance and hatred..shame on you and your ilk.
Dusty - 11 years ago
NO! What I feel will be the final vote because too many of these weak politicians are more concerned about their jobs then what has happened to thousands in another country. I have two family members who are in the military so I would not like to see them have to fight another war. How can we live our daily lives here and not stand up against the evil of this Syrian leader Assad. I voted twice for Bush and hard for me the second time because I am not so sure we needed to go to Iraq? I do feel Obama is not for war, but he also knows something has to be done to stop this kind of killing of innocent people. Some say he is just weak and should have went ahead without Congress, Oh NO! I would have done this same thing and called for a vote of Congress. One man not even President is God.
Jan Olson - 11 years ago
I voted no because I don't want war, but I think the war machine will get its way, as usual.
newby - 11 years ago
We always work together for War. Why is that Ed? How can we fund the war and not education?
Fred - 11 years ago
I voted no because I don't think they need convincing, they're foaming at the mouth over this bone. What we need is Restraint from more war and to redouble our efforts for non-military interventions. Assad's actions are atrocious, but killing more innocent people will be part of the collateral damage of any military strike, and only lead us deeper into conflict.
Dafna - 11 years ago
Obama is a lying P=O=S who wants war. How does he intend to pay for it? Why does no one ask him that? Does he plan to steal the entire SS Trust Fund? Probably. I hope Ed will ask this question on his show.
Cheri Gaspero - 11 years ago
This is just a very bad idea, and it seems Obama and Congress have learned NOTHING from Iraq, except how to make corporations richer through war!
Daniel Packman - 11 years ago
Given that the Assad government did in fact gas its own people, what should our response be, if any? If a token action that is calculated to have minimal effect in weakening the regime (so we aren't taking sides) is truly meaningless, what larger action could be taken that has any positive result? Does our reluctance in attacking Assad rest in our uncertainty in how dominant Islamic extremists are in the Syrian opposition? We are operating on too little information and limited ability to predict what our actions would do.
Carol Rominger - 11 years ago
I hope he has convinced himself? I hope someone knows ways of doing this (that I believe necessary because of the Red Flag comment, and just simply due to the horror this creature has put his own people through), that won't come back on others in the area, or us around the world. I see no way this can be done without further complicated missions. I dearly would love to know why Americans seem to be the only ones capable of helping these people. Look around where they are located in the world and see why no one nearby is willing to do something. What is Israel doing? They need to be very afraid, and we have seen many times in the past what their military can do.
Ed,
What do make of the fact that one of the few pols who had the cojanes to oppose Iraq has suddenly dropped his gyro?
Why would the leading antiwar spokesperson, just returned from Vietnam, have spoken out against the war?
Why did George McGovern, leading antiwar pol, become the single voice in the entire Congress to speak out about the genocide in Cambodia?
Have all these folks drunk Rumsfeld kool-aid? Maybe they actually know what they're doing?
I hope not!!!!! I am tired of our money going to countries who do not even us.
Ed; First I will admit I am a STAUNCH Conservative. On many things I do not agree with you, but this time we are in full agreement. The President is dead wrong on his stance of a Need to strike Syria. Do I think that Syrian leadership is being wrongfully accused? No. But if the President forces the hand and uses military action against Syria; needs to be met with a call for Impeachment for failing to acknowledge the voice & will of the U.S. people.
I certainly hope that you and your friends on the Democrat side of the aisle are somehow able to reign in the President and prevent what very well may be the start of WWIII as we the U.S. would NOT be on the side of the international community this time. We would in fact be the ones everyone would be coming for. Then again, that would certainly meet the end sought by the Muslim Brotherhood wouldn't it? Is that what this is really ALL about with Syria? The MB has stated their ultimate goal is the undoing of the Constitution & demise of the U.S. With the President being so in their camp & alleged to be a member of the MB it is also a question that needs to be part of the discussion. I know you may say that my latter comments are that of an O'Bamma hater; no, just a very concerned veteran (USMC) & citizen.
I hope the country survives these nest few weeks.
Dallas
The President said it best in Sweden today, he is not the one that drew a red line, we did long ago when we decided that we could not tolerate the slaughtering of innocent civilians at the hands of evil leadership. The United States sets the example of morality.
What? Another distraction from rebuilding OUR economy?! Mid-East countries need to step-up in the peace process now.
Ask the Corporate OWNERS, Controllers, and Commanders of the Politicians that are in
"The ReNAZIpublican Party, Inc.", perhaps they will tell you. Now FOLLOW the commands given to YOU by FAUX NOISE, (where all the news is "Fairly Unbalanced", and be OBEDIANT Corporate OWNED SLAVES like EVERY SINGLE Politician in "The ReNAZIpublican Party, Inc." are FCSCOL!
J.J.J.V.F.
Why is it ALWAYS our country that has to intervene in another's problems? My heart breaks for the many who have died in Syria, BUT...we have so many problems here at home. I cannot get any job, for over a year, and they want to cut off unemployment benefits; yet, there are (somehow) resources to fund a military campaign in other countries! And, by the way, my son served two tours of duty in Afghanistan. He came home. Many did not. Please, enough! This country needs some serious help. That is where the focus should be.
While I realize we cannot sit back and do nothing, we must find a way to Publicly & Financially get international support and address the situation as an international unit, not as an action of the U.S... for retaliation will be our demise.
I feel sorry for the Syrians, but we aren't the only country in this world, where is the United Nations? They haven't done anything for years, we must pick our congress from those countries. The United Nations is just a name, if we were smart we would pull out of the U.N. and take care of our own. Civil war is a mess, and we don't need to stick our noses in, let them fight their own battles. Who would help us if our Gov't. started pushing their citizens around, the answer id NO BODY. There is enough Middle East countries to pitch in and help Syria, if they wanted to. For what it is worth GET THE HELL OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST. James
Deep in my heart, I don't believe the President wants military action and is counting on the house to say no because they say no to everything he wants.
International humanitarian aid and diplomacy are the only solutions we should consider.
NO BOMBINGS NO KILLING NO WAR.
ps @Dafna your calling Barack Obama a pos only confirms your ignorance and hatred..shame on you and your ilk.
NO! What I feel will be the final vote because too many of these weak politicians are more concerned about their jobs then what has happened to thousands in another country. I have two family members who are in the military so I would not like to see them have to fight another war. How can we live our daily lives here and not stand up against the evil of this Syrian leader Assad. I voted twice for Bush and hard for me the second time because I am not so sure we needed to go to Iraq? I do feel Obama is not for war, but he also knows something has to be done to stop this kind of killing of innocent people. Some say he is just weak and should have went ahead without Congress, Oh NO! I would have done this same thing and called for a vote of Congress. One man not even President is God.
I voted no because I don't want war, but I think the war machine will get its way, as usual.
We always work together for War. Why is that Ed? How can we fund the war and not education?
I voted no because I don't think they need convincing, they're foaming at the mouth over this bone. What we need is Restraint from more war and to redouble our efforts for non-military interventions. Assad's actions are atrocious, but killing more innocent people will be part of the collateral damage of any military strike, and only lead us deeper into conflict.
Obama is a lying P=O=S who wants war. How does he intend to pay for it? Why does no one ask him that? Does he plan to steal the entire SS Trust Fund? Probably. I hope Ed will ask this question on his show.
This is just a very bad idea, and it seems Obama and Congress have learned NOTHING from Iraq, except how to make corporations richer through war!
Given that the Assad government did in fact gas its own people, what should our response be, if any? If a token action that is calculated to have minimal effect in weakening the regime (so we aren't taking sides) is truly meaningless, what larger action could be taken that has any positive result? Does our reluctance in attacking Assad rest in our uncertainty in how dominant Islamic extremists are in the Syrian opposition? We are operating on too little information and limited ability to predict what our actions would do.
I hope he has convinced himself? I hope someone knows ways of doing this (that I believe necessary because of the Red Flag comment, and just simply due to the horror this creature has put his own people through), that won't come back on others in the area, or us around the world. I see no way this can be done without further complicated missions. I dearly would love to know why Americans seem to be the only ones capable of helping these people. Look around where they are located in the world and see why no one nearby is willing to do something. What is Israel doing? They need to be very afraid, and we have seen many times in the past what their military can do.