Stanek weekend question: Should the U.S. bomb Syria?
UPDATE 9/8, 5a: Should’ve thought of this yesterday. Have added a poll asking the weekend question at the bottom of the post.
9/7, 9:20a: Should the United States use force in Syria to stop dictator president Bashar al-Assad from using chemical weapons against his own people, particularly children?
President Obama has made this more than a generalized question on war and death and brought it close to home for anti-abortion Americans by using children as his rationale. Quoting from NBC News:
“I want people to understand that gassing innocent people, delivering chemical weapons against children, is not something we do,” the president said. “It’s prohibited in active wars between countries. We certainly don’t do it against kids.”
The United States says that Assad, more than two years into a civil war, gassed 1,400 people to death, including more than 400 children, in a rebel-controlled neighborhood Aug. 21.
Actually, it is something we do. According to Guttmacher, 17% of the 1.2 million abortions committed in the U.S. every year are chemically induced via mifepristone, i.e., RU-486 (and 32% of all first trimester abortions committed by U.S.-funded and Obama-beloved Planned Parenthood). And countless preborn lives are lost to the birth control pill and various emergency contraceptives.
It was thirteen months ago that Obama drew a “red line” with Syria on the use of chemical weapons. Comedian Jon Stewart noted one irony:
If memory serves, 100,000 Syrians have already died during the conflict with President Bashar al-Assad – already, with no military intervention from the West. So why now?… See, the ‘red line’! You can’t use chemicals to kill your own people, you have to do it organically. America and the world want to make sure Assad only uses locally-sourced free long-range ordnance.
The other irony, as noted above, is that President Obama promotes both the chemically and organically induced deaths of over one million preborn Americans every year.
But ironies aside, and back to the original question, you think America should bomb Syria to stop the dictator regime from using chemical weapons to murder innocent people, including children?
[The tragic top photo (click to enlarge) via redejovemhits.com]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Simply put, no because other innocent Syrians are going to perish if we strike – which is a whole other type of evil. We need to stay out and keep our heroic, war-weary American troops home with their families. Let these heroes be heroes in flesh to their wives and children and give them the time they deserve to love and bond with their families.
Also, President Obama’s military ‘expertise’ is the equivalent of a short dog in tall grass.
LL <3
I agree. Attacking is an awful idea. Way to many people will die because of us.
Dear Jill, as you know, I have been a fan of yours for many years. The view from Europe is very different than what the American media is portraying. There is some evidence that the rebels killed civilians themselves, and this is being investigated by several sources.
In addition, this administration has been the most anti-life in the history of America. I lived in Illinois when this president was senator and his anti-life record was abysmal then. We pro-lifers in Illinois worked hard to stop him from getting the Dem nomination-we knew his record. We failed. I started my blog in 2007 for the purpose of helping Catholics think like Catholics, and many of my postings were against the possibility of a president for death in 2008
The hypocrisy of the States is an embarrassment to Americans in Europe, as our leader comes across as inept, almost stupid, about real politics in the Middle East. He cannot see that American intervention will start WWĎII; or maybe he wants that to consolidate his own position at home.
How odd that he wants to champion children in the Middle East, but not at home. How odd that he wants to aid those who kill Christians, Catholic priests, and force nuns to take children from an orphanage and hide in caves-the rebels are doing these things.
I suggest people get their news from other sources and wake up to the fact that this president really does not care about life. He only cares about power.
I think it is about oil, as most Americans do not know that Europe/Saudi was planning a new pipeline which Iran is against and Iran support the rebels. There are no coincidences.
Democrats are disturbed by images of dead children in Syria and think we should do something about it. Democrats are disturbed by images of dead children in America and proclaim the right to choose. The hypocrisy on the matter is breathtaking as certainly abortion kills more than chemical weapons in this world. Where is the red line on abortion? Do we belong in Syria either by air strikes or boots on the ground? Absolutely not. We’re not going to fix anything in Syria militarily.
Good article to better understand the whole situation – for those interested. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/08/29/9-questions-about-syria-you-were-too-embarrassed-to-ask/
I’m leaning these days towards limited strikes – send a message, but don’t go in completely as some have suggested (not on this board – some politicians).
No, no, no! There is nothing to be gained, and WW3 to start. Will bombing Syria help those who’ve been poisoned by chemical weapons? No. Will it bring them any justice? No. Will it prove how strong we are and cause Assad to change his ways? No.
Of course, the bigger point is as you already said, Jill. Obama can hardly pretend to be outraged at the use of chemical weapons against children because he sanctions it every day here at home. He’s a hypocrite and a bully himself. He doesn’t care about children or life at all.
As of right now, even France is backing down from military action. The Pope is the voice of reason in Europe and Buchanan in the States. This is not our war and will bring about WWIII. China and Russia already have ships in the same area as American ships.
Military action would be suicide. I think the president wants a crisis to deflect from his horrible record at home, plus, he can move towards more control over citizens. I wrote about the draft on my blog the past week. Obama is on record for being pro-draft.
Parents, think about that…..
Who actually deployed the chemical weapons? Which side is worse, Assad’s regime or the rebels (al Quaeda)?
A short time ago the government was praising Assad and telling us that they had al Quaeda on the run. Lately we heard that the Benghazi incident involved a coverup of gun running to the Syrian rebels (al Quaeda).
Is anyone seeing a good reason why we should be kick-starting World War III in the middle east?
I am convinced it is all about oil. Dead children have nothing, sadly, to do with it. And, an investigative group is England states that the number of dead from that highly publicized chemical weapons attack is 1,000 less than reported. That both sides have chemical weapons is known.
“As of right now, even France is backing down from military action”
France backing sown? What else is new?
Okay, I know that was lame, but I couldn’t resist.
I dug it JDC!
Should the US bomb Syria? Absolutely not. It would violate several just war principles. We can “send a message” in ways that don’t result in death and destruction for innocent people.
All those of faith, please pray and fast for peace today!
Dr. Stranglelove: Slim Pickens was wearing his ten gallon cowboy hat and hollerin Yeeehhhhaaawww! as the nuke he was straddling fell free from the bomb bay of the B 52.
The bo-RAT should hang his Nobel Peace Prize around his scrawny neck and strap himself to one of those mis-guided missiles he is so eager to launch.
It won’t change the impact it has on Syria, but it will certainly be an improvement in the rest of the world, particularly here in the USA.
As I recall the United States waged chemical warfare in Vietnam. The defoliant Agent Orange and napalm, which was barbarism on steroids.
Speaking of Vietnam I recall how the so called “Gulf of Tonkin Incident”, later shown to be a hoax blown totally out of proportion to stir up hysteria, resulting in our increased involvement in Vietnam and the senseless slaughter on both sides that ensued. Needless to say I am highly skeptical of “incidents” and what our “leaders” tell us.
Obama shot off his mouth about a “red line”. When you make threats, i.e. draw a red line, you better have a strategy planned and in place to back it up. You don’t dither and dather, wait until congress returns from break, then try to deny you ever drew the red line!
We have a so called commander in chief who has not a clue what to do. Hopefully congress can provide some face saving. That’s what you get when you put a community organizer with a charming smile in charge.
As for the missiles, no we should not strike. This is a complex civil war, none of these people like us and we can’t be certain who we are helping and who we may put in charge. It could be people who make Assad look like Little Bo Peep. Yes the gassing was horrific. So are dropping bombs. So are innocent people caught in crossfires. So are innocent people killed in missile strikes.
These strikes would do nothing more than create more chaos, death, and possibly aid our enemies. It may result in wider conflict. This is much too big a price to pay to save the face of a community organizer who doesn’t know when to put a sock in it.
This president and his administration are JUST. SO. BAD.
Hi Ken,
Oh yes, the Nobel Peace Prize. He got that for what, breathing?
Mary,
You go girl!!!
If Assad is the problem, then one well placed .22 caliber missile between his lying eyes will provide the solution.
If the story is to believe that Ibin bad Assad nauseum is the one responsible for the attrocity, then there is no shortage of Syrians who have just had their sons and daughters gassed to death who would trade their life for his.
the 0’bamateur and Ibin bad Assad nauseum could have a ham sandwich summit and play with their boy toys before they get down to the serious business of determining who gets to pick the next Syrian dictator.
President Obama even admitted he wasn’t sure if the one he’ll be striking are the guilty ones. Seriously? We’re going to “punish” people by for killing innocent people by killing even more innocent people ourselves and even then we won’t be sure that the ones we’re trying to punish are actually guilty of what we’re punishing them for!
Hi Sydney M
Exactly.
We have a rank amateur who is in over his head.
“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLprurE7EVl”
Apparently, this video is unavailable.
Mary,
I do appreciate your ability to recall the lessons of the past.
One incident that is more recent than Vietnam is the Branch Davidian compound near Waco, Texas.
Federal agents wearing military helmets, bullet proof vests and using fully automatic military assault rifles invaded a religious community under false pretenses. [they lied to a judge to get search and arrest warrants.]
When the members of that community fought back, the federal agents retreated, carrying their dead and wounded with them.
They then laid siege to the community, using military tanks, armored personel carriers, planes and helicopters. [There are allegations that special ops team were deployed and used before, during and after the initial raid, which is a clear violation of federal law.]
The last thing the federal agents used against the children, women and men was a ’gas’ that is outlawed by international community for use in ‘civilized warfare.’
All this was authorized by a democRAT president Clinton and democRAT attorney general Janel Reno.
democRAT Texas governoress, Ann ‘wrinkles’ Richards stood idly by and watched while most of the world looked on in stunned disbelief as the resulting conflagration was broadcast live by a pliant and submissive media.
Hi Ken,
This song from our era says it all about our fearless leader.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuccjTyfi60
Jerry and Hans should remember this too. Well, barely anyway!
Sorry about that JDC,
Just go to youtube and type in children sing to Obama. Several videos.
I love the remaking of songs for leaders/politicians/political entertainers!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhMepzqJvIw
Hi Ken,
And these people had done what? The feds could have nabbed David Koresh on his many excursions to town.
Great video EGV,
Are there any about community organizers from Chicago turned commander in chief?
Mary – According to the Waco newspaper, child abuse, statutory rape, and broken federal/state firearm laws.
Mary – there might be – you’d have to look.
For a perpetually relevant example of the unlimited capacity of the hyporcisy of hypocrites see: Casablanca [which is espańol for ‘white house’.]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPlF7tP_zYc
The Germans complain that the French are having too much fun and demand that ‘government’ do something about it. The Morrocan police chief has to do something to placate the offended sensabilities of the Nazi’s so he reacts out of an abundance of self serving caution and immediatley shuts down the Americans nightclub because he is ‘Shocked!!!’ to discover there is gambling going on in the back room and then in the next breath the cop thanks the croupier for his winnings from that evenings gambling.
Hi EGV, 11:54am
Sounds like the type of thing that occurs in our neighborhoods every day. I haven’t seen any feds or tanks.
Mary – I’m just saying what they did – you asked what they did, and the word is they were abusing kids and raping young girls. Your response to that is your decision.
Thanks EGV,
I did ask and you answered.
Where Does A democRAT go from here?
Marianne Williamson, Huffington Post, January 2, 2010
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marianne-williamson/where-does-a-democrat-go_b_408557.html
“The whole [0’bamateur] phenomenon brings up memories from my distant past: the good-looking guy who talks real good, whose line you don’t buy immediately but whose charm is so dazzling that he gradually convinces you that this time it will be different.”
“I see so many people now — many of them men, interestingly enough — tangled up in an almost school-girlish, co-dependent, apologetic relationship with this President [b o]. As though “poor baby” should be tacked onto the end of every description of his failures….”
“I remember Bobby
[RFK] and I remember Martin
[MLK].
I remember when there was a moral force at the center of the [democRAT ]Party.
I see it sometimes still, in … an Anthony Weiner.”
missy Williamson is a Oprah annointed ‘must read’ gal.
Ex-RINO says: September 7, 2013 at 12:07 pm
Mary – I’m just saying what they did – you asked what they did, and the word is they were abusing kids and raping young girls. Your response to that is your decision.
One way to eradicate abuse is to eliminate the victims.
But I suppose there are some sicko democRATs who could still get their jollies from engaging in coitus with an incinerated corpse.
I just hope the children of Syria are not depending on a democRAT to save them from their abusers.
Based on the events in Waco, Texas, the democRAT cure is likely to be more cruel than the curses they have endured.
No bombing, no strikes, no military aggression what-so-ever. Bombing a country and killing innocent men, women, and children in the process using the excuse of punishing that country’s dictator for doing the same is about an illogical as it gets. Not to mention the fact that it’s looking more and more likely the said chemical attack was a false flag actually perpetuated by the “rebels”. Even more alarming is the fact that Kerry himself mentioned that the Saudis are willing to financially support this action – the same Saudis who continue funding extremists for their own cynical purposes.
As many have already pointed out this military action against Assad is not about what he may or may not have done, but rather it is about the oil pipeline – and more specifically about the currency that will be used to buy and sell that oil.
This is about global bankers punishing any country that wishes to retain its sovereignty and issue and trade in its own non-debt based currency. Evil as some of these dictators may be, they are at least trying to prevent their citizens from becoming debt slaves to the global banking cartel. Libya is an excellent example – a country whose “rebels” somehow set up a central bank within weeks of their uprising. This has been in the making for a very long time (General Wesley Clark went public with these pre-planned military endeavors over a decade ago now), and once again the US government is being bullied into going against the long-term needs, interests, and desires of its citizens by the money printers. Make no mistake, these same parties will sacrifice and demonize the US when it is convenient for them, after much bloodshed, loss of innocent life, and economic suffering around the globe – including right here in the states.
The very best thing the US can do is stop its policy of meddling and arming so-called rebels to create instability around the globe and attempt to work through diplomacy in Syria. Any honest and honorable leaders we have left here in the US need to focus on our domestic problems while weeding out the utterly corrupt politicians who have already pushed us too far on this course. Accomplished economist Paul Craig Roberts has written some excellent commentary on the Syria situation recently and what US military action will inevitably lead to and cost the US citizens. Whether or not the citizens here in the US and elsewhere can come together to stop this insanity is yet to be seen, but we must all do our best to at least voice our opposition and stand united in peace and love.
I believe that anyone who stands for life must also be against rampant military interventionism and only support military action when it is used only as a last resort in response to a verified threat or attack against our country.
No. We do not need to attack a sovereign nation who has not attacked us. It is NOT our fight. We are NOT the world’s police. The plight of Syria’s Christians will only be worse if we get involved, not better.
“The whole [0’bamateur] phenomenon brings up memories from my distant past: the good-looking guy who talks real good, whose line you don’t buy immediately but whose charm is so dazzling that he gradually convinces you that this time it will be different.”
This is so much better coming from one of Oprah’s enlightened ones who bought the lie and bedded the bo-RAT, but finally heard the ‘pop’.
ms Williamson’s past became her prologue, it’s deja vu all over again. Her karma has overtaken her….again. She doubled down on dumb and lost more money on the re-play. She sowed to the windy ‘0ne’, and reaped a flatulent whirl wind.
Williamson is one of those Oprah/Obama kind of ‘christians’. They have eaten from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, but the fruit of the Tree of Life is a mystery to them.
Prov 15:4 The tongue that brings healing is a tree of life, but a deceitful tongue crushes the spirit. NIV
Hi Ken,
RFK and MLK moral forces of the Democrat Party? As attorney general RFK authorized the wiretapping of MLK. I can’t find anywhere that MLK was a Democrat, his niece insists he was Republican like his father.
Ms. Williamson, that memory from your distant past sounds exactly like your typical sociopathic con man. Hey, I’ve encountered a few myself. You’re correct, they dazzle you with their charm, making you totally oblivious to reality.
Oh yes, the apologetic relationship. Also typical of sociopaths who can have such an amazing hold on the people they have conned. No matter what we still love the guy, its not his fault, he’s misunderstood, Republicans only oppose him because he’s black, everyone opposes Syria because of Bush and Iraq. The dejected lovers who just can’t face the facts. Hey, been there done that.
Democrat Party ”moral force”? Anthony Weiner, flasher extraordinaire and one man porn show.
I must ask at this point – I just wasn’t surprised to see so many peace and love hippies on this board -
How many of you were consistently against all three wars/strikes (Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria), and how many have changed their minds about these interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan concerning these types of situations? Or do folks see massive differences in the three in which one or two would have been justified, but not others?
Just curious. I see McCain and a lot of GOPers with consistent messages on how to handle these situations – just didn’t expect to see everybody on this site against any sort of strike (even limited).
“How many of you were consistently against all three wars/strikes (Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria), and how many have changed their minds about these interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan concerning these types of situations?”
I was pretty young when most of that happened but I do remember I was especially opposed to the Iraq invasion. I don’t agree with this Syria thing either. I don’t see a good reason for us to involve ourselves in someone else’s civil war.
Jack – do you feel like using chemical weapons in war should just be acceptable? Or they have to use a lot? I suppose my question is – are there general international rules of conduct that should be upheld, and if not, should we do something about them?
EGV,
I opposed the invasion of Iraq and think we should have gotten out of Afghanistan ASAP, as soon as we wiped out the Al Qaeda bases there.
Libya, a previous attempt at ousting a dictator by supporting rebels with a few bombs and no boots on the ground has left the country a lawless hellholes. In my lifetime I have seen our ”interventions”, i.e. us trying to influence the course of events, lead to nothing but disaster. Our constant efforts to bring down Castro only shored him up. Had we played our cards right in the late 40’s and early 50’s we could have had friends and influence in Vietnam instead of the fiasco we had.
Lyndon Johnson getting his Gulf of Tonkin Resolution is the classic example of how the gods punish man by giving them what they ask for. I have pointed out the manipulating and lying behind that. Johnson thought there was nothing a few bombs and a couple of bribes to Ho Chi Minh couldn’t take care of. He was to learn different.
We stick our noses into situations with no thought to the culture, history, or perspective of the people we are “helping”. That’s what got us in the quagmire of Vietnam.
Same with Syria. Do we think strikes will stop Assad, assuming he’s even responsible for the gas attacks, from using them again? What will we do if he does? If someone else does?
Should the U.S. bomb Syria?
Only if the bomb is a suicide vest and the bo-RAT is the karmakazi wearing the Samson, model ‘C4’, vest complete with Nobel Peace Prize.
Judg 16:30 And Samson cried, Let me die with the Philistines! And he bowed himself mightily, and the house fell upon the princes and upon all the people that were in it. So the dead whom he slew at his death were more than they whom he slew in his life. AMP
I never was much good at calculus, but that is an equation I could be down with.
On Monday, August 20, 2012 the bo-RAT, said that any effort by Ibin bad Assad nasueum to move or use chemical weapons would have serious consequences.
“We have been very clear to the Ibin bad Assad nauseum regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a RED LINE for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus,” the bo-RAT said.
Is this a Tyler Perry movie?
Is Madeira threatening, “Don’t you make me come down there!”
“I am going to tell your father when he comes home!”
Mary – according to gallup, before the Iraq war, about 35% of people were against it. Syria is right about 50% right now – so I applaud your consistency.
For the record – I think it would be a deterrent to Assad – but no guarantee – but I will say this – if somebody does something and gets no punishment, they are more likely to do it again than if they get no punishment.
Ex-Gop
…from day one I was against the wars in Iraq (and Afghanistan) and was called on the carpet at my job in a Catholic institution in 2003 to explain why I was the ONLY faculty member against….I used Thomas Aquinas and the evil of preemptive strikes to make my point. The administration agreed to disagree and I was not fired.
Do not be so rash to judge, as many of us have not believed that the Middle Eastern wars are our wars and only believe in just war theories. Many of us have been of the mind-set of Pat Buchanan for years and years.
I think it’s a hard issue. I think chemical weapons are a special kind of awful, but at the same time I don’t see how it’s less awful to see children ripped into pieces from IED’s and other non-chemical weapons.
I do think there should be international rules of conduct, but I think it’s a touchy subject when Russia is against us intervening and most of the world doesn’t seem to support the way we want to handle the issue. I don’t know why the US seems to think that we can act unilaterally in every situation regardless of what other countries think.
Marie Dean – I’m quite sure there are people on this board who have been consistently against all of those efforts – and I applaud those that are consistent.
What I’m guessing though – and we’ll see – is that there are certain people who would favor doing something if Obama said we shouldn’t intervene. And if he said ground troops, they’d say limited. And if he said he’d like to order them all vanilla ice cream to help them relax, they’d so chocolate. Know what I’m getting at?
So big time applause to you – huge minority in regards to Afghanistan (less than 20% were against it before the war) and the other two situations.
Just wondering – do you think we should just get rid of international laws on chemical weapons?
Hi Ken,
“Other players on the ground”? Now that really complicates things. Who do we hit and how do we locate them?
Jack – Well, Russia is against it because they sell them weapons and trade a lot with them.
I’m not saying there’s an easy answer – I’m just saying that if we say chemical weapons are bad because they frequently are used in targeting civilians, then somebody should dish out some sort of punishment when they are used.
Ken you’re so creepy sometimes. Can you please dislike Obama and his administration without making jokes about his death?
Well yeah Russia seems to be in bed with Assad. It’s kinda like us protecting our less than savory allies because of trade and such. But anyway, fact remains that a lot of the world seems to think our interventions aren’t a great idea. I don’t see the point of a UN and international diplomacy if we’re just gonna be all “lol nope we’re doing this, sorry guize”
EGV,
If there is an international standard against chemical weapons, then let the international community act. We aren’t the world policeman.
They and us collectively sat on our hands when Saddam gassed Iranian troops during the Iran/Iraq War and his own people. The international community had no problem with genocide when the Rwandans were butchering each other. To me killing is killing. Bombs, bullets, missiles and machetes are not any more moral than chemical weapons.
The bo-Rat must actually believe he is the president of the United States and the rest of the world really cares what he thinks.
Real heads of state consult with one another before they issue ‘RED LINE’ ultimatums. Then having agreed privately, they determine what to say publicly and then what to do if the ultimatum is ignored or violated.
The bo-RAT deviated from TOTUS and tried to operate his bike without the training wheels off.
Whoops, now he has a run into a wall and has a boo boo, ‘poor baby’.
Well, bo-RAT, it’s time for some payback and kissing up to those of whom you have been ‘dismissive, even derissive’.
That’s all right. You can send your obsequious, servile, psychophantic, devotees to do the fun work. Your boy toys are accomplished brown noses and experienced boot lickers.
If all else fails you can shift the blame for this debacle to someone else.
Ex-Gop
There are several problems. Of course, we need international law, the Geneva Conventions, etc. The problem is complicated by several factors. One, there are too many rogues who are not beholding to international law, either as they think they are above the law, or their false religion is above all laws but theirs. Two, the UN is worthless at this point and suffering, rightly so, from a lack of trust on the part of those who distrust the UN stand on other issues, such as wanting abortion for all nations and more recently, ssm and gender issues. Three, the real problem is that once nations or a nation has disengaged law from the Judeo-Roman-Christian traditions of natural law philosophy, the Ten Commandments and the Tradition of the Catholic Church, the moorings of law are gone. Laws then become whatever those in power say these are.
Natural law philosophy is no longer taught as the basis of law in most law colleges and has not been for thirty or more years. Which leads to the fourth problem: nations are not approaching these serious war crimes, regardless of who has perpetrated them, from the same legal basis. All is fair in love and jihad, for example; and the realpolitik, about which I wrote last week, is ignored by Obama, because he is a man of ideology.
As to thinking America is more moral than Russia, one must put aside that myth. America lost its moral leadership with Roe v. Wade and we have no moral right to preach to anyone at this stage without returning to our Christian roots.
America is now just one more immoral nation on the block. To play the world’s policeman is just plain hypocrisy. But, as I said above, this is NOT about morality, but OIL,
That’s fair Mary – I think waiting until there’s enough evidence and building a conclusive case is a solid option.
“. Three, the real problem is that once nations or a nation has disengaged law from the Judeo-Roman-Christian traditions of natural law philosophy, the Ten Commandments and the Tradition of the Catholic Church, the moorings of law are gone. Laws then become whatever those in power say these are.”
Oh my goodness this stuff again. You realize it’s really, really unflattering to “Judeo-Christian morals” to act as though the US was following them in our prior history, Do “Judeo-Christian morals” approve of slavery, Jim Crow, the Native American genocide and subsequent attempt by government to erase Native American culture, internment of Japanese-Americans, etc? That stuff was all fine, we weren’t an immoral nation because of it?
But, once we approved of gay marriage in a handful of states, that was IT! We’re now immoral.
Marie Dean -
I think America might have lost the moral leadership when we had slave labor driving our economy, but that’s just two cents.
So you pretty much are an isolationist at this point?
On the oil – can you further explain? Do you feel like the point is to go in, take over the country, and send back all the oil? Didn’t we stop exports from Syria a few years back?
Ha – yes Jack – I’ve always enjoyed asking people – “when exactly were we a Christian nation???”
“Ha – yes Jack – I’ve always enjoyed asking people – “when exactly were we a Christian nation???””
Lol. I just don’t think people realize how bad it would make Christianity look if we were actually a Christian nation in our past. It’s just myopic.
And I find it HILARIOUS when people act as though Catholic law was what we based… anything off of. Catholics were quite subjugated and persecuted in our early days, since most of our settlers were some form of Protestant or another.
I mentioned the oil pipeline in the making to the EU. You can look this up online or on my blog. i have commented too much, methinks…
Ha – yes Marie Dean – we finally agree on something – when one tries to make the case we were somehow a moral nation up until the 1960’s – well, yes, methinks you have commented too much as well!
Hi EGV, 3:08PM
We definitely agree. First things first.
We did outlaw slavery, but right now, live Adoration from Rome is more important than discussion, imo
International rules of conduct can be (and have been) upheld with actions other than a military strike.
We had legal slavery for like a century after the official founding and it took a civil war before it was outlawed, and then black people remained second class citizens until the century that most of us were born in. I don’t think that’s a “plus” in the column of “were we ever a Christian nation?”.
Lrning
So what are you supporting regarding punishment?
IMO it has not yet been established definitively who did what, so I’m not supportive of punishment when we don’t even know who deserves the punishment. An idea I think might have a possibility of resulting in justice is a war crimes tribunal. Today I am simply fasting and praying that leaders of nations receive the needed wisdom.
NO!!!!!
No no no no no no no no.
1) We have got to lose the notion that we can stamp out evil. We can’t. Not as a nation. That is not and never has been our job. Sorry.
2) Our own babies are being killed chemically every day. Let’s stop that atrocity first.
3) I’m sick of our men and women dying for other dictators’ dalliances. So freakin sick of it. Bring our men and women home, let them boost our economy and live their lives in peace and make our country a better place – from the inside out. We are already losing so many bright and amazing young Americans. We cannot afford it.
4) Has anyone forgotten that we are still massively in debt? Do you know how much one of those bombs costs????? We cannot afford it.
I’ll throw in my two cents before going further in the thread.
I really do believe that as the one superpower in the world, we are it’s policeman. It is our responsiblility as the “elder sibling” to weigh in on the side of the oppressed.
But these days it’s getting harder and harder to decide if one side is really any better than the other. It was easier to shore up a tinhorn dictator when the rebels were puppets of a malevolent force like Communism. Today that force is radical Islam.
The Congo and that mini-rebellion in Iran were better calls for some sort of intervention. I can’t support stepping in on behalf of these friends of Al-Qaeda.
No military action in Egypt, either. And, the minister imprisoned in Iran is not worthy of one American life–he knew the risks.
No surprise the antiabortion nutcases compare RU486 to what’s going on in Syria, though. Of course, would they compare corporate negligence that causes miscarriage, too? Probably not. Corporations are worshiped by the right wingers.
Not only no but……(you guess the rest).
This crisis is doing a great job of misdirectiong our attention from the scandals of Benghazi, “Fast and Furious”, the selective targetting by the IRS of conservative groups, the monitoring of Americans by the NSA, etc and etc.
Can you say “Wag The Dog”? Sure you can!
I’m just so worn out from all the posturing, the symbolic actions, the great speeches, the well spun rhetoric, the giant nothing wrapped up in a pretty bow. The best line from Captain James T. Kirk: “No more blah blah blah!” My own blah blah blah aside, I think we should steer clear for a change, and see how that works out. The chaos and bloodshed will be our fault no matter what.
Every Democrat in the United States who is isn’t railing against their pro-death party abortion platform is responsible for more killing of humans with chemical weapons than Assad himself. What a bunch of bold-faced hypocrites they are.
truthseeker, who do you lay miscarriages on? God? Corporations?
Miscarriages happen for all sorts of reasons. As far as I know a part of the definition of miscarriage is that it was intentional so I don’t think I would ‘lay it on’ anybody.
Should have read unintentional, and not intentional.
But on the other hand is the DemocRATic party supporting the intentional ‘choice’ to kill unborn children on purpose cause it is ‘less expensive’ than raising a kid and they can make a lot of money doing it cause the decent folk won’t kill unborn children. How many Replublicans do you know who are key-note speakers for Planned Parenthood?
Obama has enough problems at home! He needs to solve them before sticking his hands outside of our borders. So many mishandled issues domestically and he wants us, the taxpayers, to fund this strike on Syria? Subvet is correct. This is a smoke-screen tactic to divert our attention. But what would Obama gain from proceeding with this plan? Nothing. But lose he will plenty. The international community is already viewing him as somewhat of a cretin…
Just to add to my earlier thoughts, not only is the US no longer the world’s only super power, but we no longer have any moral authority to act as world police due to our own ugly history with chemical and other ugly weapons. People must see through the fog and smoke and mirrors and realize that all wars are and always have been bankers wars – they are the only ones who profit no matter what side wins or loses. Sure they will come up with all sorts of feel good reasons why we should get behind them, but strip that away and you’ll realize only the military industrial complex and money changers/printers ever come out ahead in war – as tax payers we lose, as world citizens we lose, as mothers and fathers of active duty personnel we really lose – you get the idea.
As for being a peace and love hippy – well you got me there, I am and always have been. I have been against each and every military adventure we’ve gotten involved in since I’ve been alive and even long before that as I’ve come to learn more and more history. The neocon MIC agenda has infected way too many on both the right and the left in this country, and frankly the right/left distinction shouldn’t even be used anymore as both parties are available for purchase to the highest corporate bidder or financier.
I also don’t really understand how the left came to own abortion, but it is their extremism on the issue and utter corruption that has led many like myself away from democratic politics. I mean even many European countries who systems the progressive left seems to want to emulate here so badly don’t permit abortion after 12 weeks. I believe many of us who left the dem party find ourselves now active in more libertarian/classical liberal leaning circles and the liberty segment of the right. Once you come to understand the true concepts of freedom, liberty, and natural law, it’s not much of a leap to understand that fundamental principle must be extended to all human beings no matter their age or stage of gestation. Anything less and the slippery slope becomes very ugly very quickly. The early feminists and civil rights leaders had a very good reason to take a strong stance against abortion.
As for being pro-corporate, I never have been and I never will be, and I know many on the right you aren’t. What most on the left fail to realize is that it’s the big government they love so much that allows these corporations to grow and exist in the first place. Take away their handouts that are often designed as welfare for the poor, ability to have the federal government draft and enforce laws to their benefit, kushy subsidies, access to easy credit, and taxpayer bailouts any and every time these corporations screw up, and you’ll find them dissolving very, very quickly. But as long as we have a massive federal government they can buy, they aren’t going anywhere and they know it. Why else do you think so many corporate investors donate heavily to both parties.
Anyway, those are just my two added cents to some of the more recent comments I’ve read here. I should mention being new that I’m glad to have found Jill’s blog and have felt very welcome in participating. Jill and the regular commenters here have helped me in many ways they’ll probably never even know. But the kindness and compassion most of them show on nearly every issue has been a real blessing.
Well, truthseeker, I suppose you don’t know the history of Richard Nixon concerning Planned Parenthood, do you? Or, Dwight David Eisenhower?
http://saynsumthn.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/eisenhower.jpg
truthseeker, here’s Nixon:
http://saynsumthn.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/nixon-blacks-inferior.jpg
Merit,
This article on Nixon, which you can’t even read and is only headlined “Ehrlichman Says Nixon Considered Blacks as Inferior”.
This proves what? Any better source than this?
This might offer you a little more insight:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Which_Presidents_were_supportive_of_the_Civil_Rights_Movement
Merit, as you struggle to find GOP candidates who support Planned Parenthood (went back to the Nazi era to find a reference); can you at least admit that the Democrat Party platform does support using chemical weapons to kill humans(as in supports Planned Parenthood)?
truth – aren’t you pro-death penalty? The chemical cocktail?
No. I don’t think the state should execute anyone cause they are so inept and corrupt. Didn’t you vote for the death president and say you were for his plan to strike Syria with missiles?
How many humans are you responsible for killing with chemical cocktails Ex-RINO? Oh yeah, that’s right; You deny any responsibility for anything the DemocRATs do even though you support them when they do it. Just one of the advantages of having no scruples and no conscience. You can watch thousands of babies get slaughtered every day and not even raise a finger to stop funding and supporting the killers.
Merit, I seem to recall Cecile Richards; CEO of the largest abortion industry in the US; as being a keynote speaker at last years DnC (DemocRATic national Convention). They welcomed her and applauded her as they enshrined the killing of unborn children as part and parcel of their platform. And you do admit to yourself that Planned Parenthood and the king of the abortion industry Obama as they work together to make chemical abortions available at no cost under Obamacare right? And you even make said chemicals available over the counter to unemancipated minors without parental consent or involvement. A you and Ex-RINO have the unmitigated audacity to call other people hypocrites.
truthseeker, the “Nazi” era was Nixon?
Anyway, get over yourself. It’s got to be frustrating for your ego that individual women and not you determine what to do with a pregnancy.
And, Plan B is NOT an abortifacient. But believe what you want. Most of you do anyway. Ironic some of you whine about late term abortions, but then whine about Plan B, too. Guess it bugs you women (many unmarried) can have sex and not have forced childbirth.
And I guess it doesn’t bug you to be a funding member of the largest killer of humans on the planet. You are a sick, sick, sick person.
Merit, what is your primary motive…. is it a good trade-off to support women in killing their unborn children so that you can have sex with them and not get tied down? Or are you actually a worker in the abortion industry who profits from the killing of unborn children? Or are just a loyal DemocRAT?
NO !
Late term abortions. Plan B. Saline. D & E. Live birth abortion.
Yeah they “bug” me.
The end result is a dead human being.
Carla, Plan B does not cause an abortion.
Truthseeker, the sexual lives of consenting adults are not your concern, are they?
If pregnancy isn’t a possible consequence for having sex, it drives the religious voyeurs nuts–especially if those consenting adults aren’t following the “teachings” of the various churches. God forbid people have sex for pleasure instead of merely for procreation. Sunday mornings are the best times, by the way.
Truthseeker asks: “Merit, what is your primary motive….”
I have said this before and will repeat it now: merit and pro-abortionists like Merit want women to have unlimited sex without any consequences whether in a committed relationship or not. And obviously in her response to Carla above, Merit again fails in her logic, as yes – pregnancy is a very real consequence of making whoopi. Merit starts off well but loses quickly on diverting from the actual premise with smoke-screen arguments.
Oh ok Merit.
Late term abortions. Saline. D & E. Live birth abortion.
Yeah they “bug” me.
The end result is a dead human being.
Thomas R, it must bug you that people can have sex without pregnancy resulting. Just think of all those who are unmarried but live together and are in their 60’s and 70’s. No pregnancy results in those cases! And, they don’t have to follow the mandates of their preachers or priests!
You must as always not read correctly Merit. I have not ever alleged anywhere on this blog that people have sex independent of the desire to conceive. Direct to a comment of mine that argues that? What I have been attempting to impress upon you, is that sex carries a high probability of the resultant consequence of pregnancy.
You are one hilarious person with your comeback about those beyond child-bearing years. The world you speak of promotes abortion among those women who are able to reproduce, and thus your diversion here is a non-sequitur. What if I throw off your silly argument by advising you that many man 60 and over, have intercourse with women of child-bearing ability. What about those cases? Hooray for making whoopi for those women too?
Thomas, you posted:
“I have said this before and will repeat it now: merit and pro-abortionists like Merit want women to have unlimited sex without any consequences whether in a committed relationship or not.”
My response:
“Thomas R, it must bug you that people can have sex without pregnancy resulting.”
And, this was the additional part of the response:
“Just think of all those who are unmarried but live together and are in their 60?s and 70?s. No pregnancy results in those cases! And, they don’t have to follow the mandates of their preachers or priests!”
Either it bugs you or doesn’t bug you, Thomas.
Merit, I asked you what your primary motive was and all your responses, including the ones directed to Thomas, had to do with sex without procreation or consequence. So you don’t actually work in the abortion industry but you are ok with abortion cause it opened up your pool of women to have sex with use BC and/or abortion if the contraceptives fail. You really are that shallow.
Merit, what you are saying is that for you it is a good trade-off to support women in killing their unborn children so that you can have sex with them and not get tied down.
You are for a lack of a stronger word so SUPERFICIAL in your view of the human condition “merit.” The cause is not as important as the effect for me but it seems to be the impetus for your day-to-day functioning. The consequences of one’s actions and how one responds to these consequences speak more about a person than the isolated causes of their behaviors.
You advocate for unlimited causes without any forethought to being consequential. I am a total opposite from you as I take responsibility for my causes beyond copping out. Has running away from ”looking in the mirror” been working out for you “merit?”
truthseeker and Thomas, you can assume all you want. However, your frustrations don’t make any assumptions true.
I would venture to propose that I am right on target with my assessment “merit.” BTW I spend Sundays and every other day of tghe week with the sons my wife and I conceived – isn’t the consequence of sex wonderful!!!
Merit, I am not making any assumptions. I asked you what your motivation is for supporting abortion and ‘sex for pleasure’ seemed to be the theme that dominated your responses. If that was not what you meant to say then explain yourself further.
Merit,
Emergency ‘contraception’ most certainly DOES cause abortion. Besides stopping ovulation; another affect of taking high dose emergency contraception is that it hardens the woman’s uterine lining. If the women has already ovulated prior to ingesting PlanB then the high dose of hormones PlanB will cause the uterine lining to be less receptive to a fertilized and cause the ovum to fail implantation; resulting in an aborted pregnancy abort. This is science.
Ex-RINO, On a positive note for Assad; Secretary of State Kerry did say that any US strike ordered on Syria would be unbelievably small. But on a negative note Putin did call Kerry a liar and take charge of Syria.