Watching John Kerry give Colin Powell's speech I am disgusted

[1-Old-Man]

Is there anyone left in the Democratic Party that has any integrity at all? And to think that I voted for that son of a bitch. Fuck him and fuck anyone else who will stand up and rehash every old lie and think we will buy their crap. Fuck war and fuck warmongers, no matter which Party they claim.

[malaise]

1. Sickening

Recall Congress for a vote or STFU

[Little Star]

17. Yep. Recall congress. What is the Goddamn rush?

[leftstreet]

2. Is he holding up any vials of chemical icky stuff?

[KittyWampus]

5. Here's an empty vial for you (warning pix of dead children):

Last edited Fri Aug 30, 2013, 02:09 PM - Edit history (1)

[leftstreet]

6. Did Syria do those, or the US?

So hard to tell without context

[boomer55]

8. oh you mean like when we sold biological weapons to Iraq and they used them on their own citizens an

we immediately attacked them for doing so...

I remember that. not.

we are so hypocritical as a nation it sickens me beyond belief.

[leftstreet]

10. Shhh

your logic and compassion could prevent the further chaos necessary in the ME to help military contractors put food on their families

[elehhhhna]

95. best post ever infinity

[ctsnowman]

148. lol Love it.

[iamthebandfanman]

20. Its way easier to keep your hands tied

and hide behind the actions of a senile republican president than look at the situation in front of you , isn't it ?

[TimeToGo]

58. Except

Except we didn't immediately attack them -- for the sake of accuracy.

[elehhhhna]

96. Oh. Then never mind.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

103. I suspect that the local Kurds may have minded a tad.

[Harmony Blue]

15. +1 No kidding

[Rockyj]

165. Syria NEVER attacked us!

CIA?

This should be the MAIN reason WHY we shouldn't STRIKE Syria!

Tell me if this isn't why Military Industrial Complex and Oil Corporations wanting us to strike:
"More than a year ago, a $10 billion Pipelineistan deal was clinched between Iran, Iraq and Syria for a natural gas pipeline to be built by 2016 from Iran's giant South Pars field, traversing Iraq and Syria, with a possible extension to Lebanon. Key export target market: Europe."

"...Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline would be essential to diversify Europe's energy supplies away from Russia."

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/08/201285133440424621.html”

Who owns our government? Not the American people the MIC, Wall St. & Corporations! WE DO NOT WANT WAR! President Obama strikes Syria without Congress, United Nations & International Support I will actually support the bat shit crazy Tea Partiers to IMPEACH Obama!

[Celefin]

19. Now if these beautiful children here were charred remains...

...their blackened corpses still twisted in agony, reminding you of what white phosphorous does to a living being (like in Fallujah)...
then this wouldn't even have been reported.
It would have been a legal atrocity and therefore not very interesting. No one would have paid much attention and the latest atrocity (this time indeed with white phosporous) would most likely have gone unnoticed. Just another day in hell.

I've got three beautiful kids myself and I'm so sick of this shit and the hypocrisy surrounding it.

There is NO way a military intervention is going to improve the situation. None. At best it will have no effect.
How about helping child-refugees with a hundred million dollars instead of causing sixty huge explosions?
How about helping neighboring countries deal with the stream of refugees?

But hey, that's boring. Let's add some cruise missiles to the mix, why not.
The beauty of high explosives: fireworks on CNN, a satisfying feeling of righteousness and most importantly no photo opportunities when you turn those kids into red mist or bury them under collapsing buildings. Because that's somehow nothing to get worked up about anymore.

[robbob]

48. I dont think it's because it's "boring"

I think it's because there is no big bucks to be made helping refugees; dropping (literally) billions of dollars worth or high tech weaponry on Syria will net some arms contractors big money.

[Celefin]

62. It's also marketing... *sigh* and of course you're right.

And I know that. Just can't help my cynicism sometimes.

[pangaia]

114. Follow the money.

War is very, very profitable.. nothing new there, of course...

[sabrina 1]

166. Yes, it's interesting that the photos of the children in Fallujah were never shown

in the US, but were seen all over the world.

Nor do we see the bodies of all the children killed by Drones which SHOULD be a banned weapon and hopefully will be one day.

The hypocrisy is stunning. And arming Al Queda 'rebels' in Syria ensured the escalation of a war there causing the deaths of so many more people had the West stayed out of it.

All these wars need to end, not escalated. If the US cannot influence them positively then we should step out of the picture and allow other nations who seem to not have all the enemies we have around the world, take over the process that will lead to peace.

[Enthusiast]

29. I'll remember that you, KittyWampus,

posted that picture here to goad us into a strike in Syria.

[KittyWampus]

36. I am against bombing Syria. So remember that Enthusiast. When you approve of comparing an empty vial

to 1000 dead civilians.

It's possible to object to bombing Syria without resorting to comparisons to Bush/Cheney and Colin Powell.

[elehhhhna]

97. It's possible, yes, but I prefer to acknowledge the similarities and sense of deja vu.

While we're all talking shit as the jet engines warm up.

[qazplm]

179. this times 1000

this whole Obama = Bush, chemical weapons schemical weapons no big deal bs is mindnumbingly idiotic.

it is quite easy for folks to be against this attack without engaging in either of those two idiotic and intellectually lazy and vapid arguments.

[treestar]

100. You mean it might affect you?

So you don't want to see it?

[Enthusiast]

106. No. It's not going to effect me.

But everyone has already seen it on TV. I don't like it when people hype up and encourage military action. You are welcome to post all the brutal pictures you want. While you're at it, why not include some from Saddam Hussein's regime when he gassed his own people.

[treestar]

109. Why does it encourage military action?

It is simply something that happened.

[Enthusiast]

132. Never address me.

[treestar]

149. too bad. Public message board. A photo of something that actually happened

Is fair enough.

That's how we were about Bush not wanting to block photos of coffins coming into Dover AFB, of troops who had been killed in Iraq.

[sabrina 1]

201. I couldn't tell if it was Fallujah, or the slaughtere of the Iraqis, many of them children

by Cluster Bomb as they were shopping in the market.

Any reason why the US has not prosecuted the perpetrators of those war crimes? We don't even need to send war ships and bombs across the globe to 'punish' them? We only have to arrest them, book them, then try them and send them to where they can never again do such harm to another single human being.

Why did we not see the photos from Iraq on our TV but we are being shown these? All this did was remind me of the over one MILLION human beings killed by the Bush/Cheney War Criminals and how nothing was done about it.

Cluster bombs, what that did to the children and thanks to the courageous photo journalists like Dahr Jamail, there is a record of those crimes. The US Govt tried to prevent that record.

But since this is a picture of the victims in Syria, WHO did this? Cameron admitted this week that they don't really know?

Where is the evidence before we charge off once again and kill the wrong people?

[Jeroen]

33. Frankly, I find it sickening that you keep posting these pictures to make your argument n/t

[Skidmore]

38. Better to look at the picture of those dead babies than

to bury your head in the sand and pretend that this was some sort of minor dusting. 400 plus young children have been massacred in the past few days by the Assad regime. Many were incinerated in their school, a school targeted by this monster.

The world needs to exact some measure of justice for them.

[Jeroen]

43. Did I pretend that the attack was some sort of minor dusting?

[atreides1]

65. Incinerated you say?

Yet where was cry for launching cruise missiles, then? Or does it only matter in what form the atrocity is committed?

And when does the world exact some measure of justice for the Iraqi and Afghan children that the US has murdered...or is that different?


Assad is a monster, a big monster...yet we use small monsters who operate UAVs along the Afghan-Pakistani border, and fire missiles into villages killing women and children! And we even give them medals when they do an outstanding job and accomplish their mission, even if it ends up with collateral damage!


Gods are we hypocrites or what? Calling for justice, what a crock...this is selective justice, nothing more!!!

[Carolina]

122. And we do

Double strikes - forget the exact term for them - whereby we strike the target (oops it was a collateral village) and then strike at emergency personnel responding to the first strike! How evil is that?

Kerry's a hypocritical tool

[AtheistCrusader]

68. They will never show us the dead babies WE create when we strike

until some whistleblower leaks it and they throw him or her in jail for it.

[Heather MC]

140. How many American children die every year because of our policies on

Guns, healthcare, and so on.
How many children were killed during Ruwanda
Look we can't go running in guns blazing everytime something bad happens. Why do we have to be the police of the world? Yes we helped create this mess when went to war with Iraq. But starting another war will only help the contractors who get rich off this sirt of thing. If 400 dead babies sadens you, what will the deaths of 4000 Troops do to you?

War hurts far more that it ever helps. And I don't see way we need more air hangers filled with the bodies of American Troops. They sensationalize this all they want. We are being pushed into another BS Iraq War just on Serian Soil.

[shotten99]

142. They said the same thing about Bosnia in the 90s

As a member of the Veterans for Peace, I have zero regrets about my time served in Bosnia.

I'd warn everyone to stop conflating all of these conflicts. They're anything but identical.

[Heather MC]

144. "Conflicts" is a pleasant word for war

I am just hoping, it doesn't become one of those conflicts, that looks more like a war.
That's all

I am a military spouse. I prefer conflicts that are war free.

The news is making it soumd like all out war is the only option

[shotten99]

200. I agree, but honestly believe this isn't going to be a big deal on our part

In my humble opinion, I simply sincerely doubt that any involvement in Syria would go beyond air strikes.

[KittyWampus]

46. I find it sick that some DU'ers claim this didn't happen, it's false flag or it's akin to Powell's

empty vial.

And other DU'ers have posted pix from Assad's chemical attack. Why is mine so offensive?

Is it because I post it as the comparison other DU'ers are making to an empty vial?

Maybe, just maybe, some posters can step back and think before comparing 1000 dead civilians to an empty vial.

[Jeroen]

57. No one is denying this horrible attack

And I am sure that everybody on DU is horrified and saddened by these images.
Reposting these images suggest that you think otherwise.

The question we are debating is this: is there undeniable proof that Assad ordered the attack and if so, is a military intervention the right response? It's clear that you have made up your mind and I respect that. Again, what I do find offensive is your suggestion that those who do not favor an intervention are not concerned and disturbed by the death of these children.

[Jamastiene]

203. +1000000

[Maedhros]

60. We're not claiming the attack didn't happen.

It is disingenuous for you to keep stating so.

We're questioning the unilateral rush to aggressive military action before the UN inspectors complete their investigation and publish their findings.

We demand independent, incontrovertible evidence that the Assad regime perpetrated this attack before we start killing human beings. All we have seen is yellow journalism urging military action, and no hard evidence. Nothing but emotional appeals based upon horrific images of death. Instead of "Remember the Maine!" we're getting "Think of the children!" As if the hellstorm we're about to visit on the Syrian people won't take its own toll on innocent bystanders, and as if the Administration's drone wars don't generate their own (unseen) horrific images on a weekly basis.

We object to picking and choosing which horrific violence is "an unfortunate necessity" and which is "an atrocity" based upon political loyalties.

[Celefin]

64. + one million

[KittyWampus]

72. DU'ers are saying Kerry's speech = Colin Powell's vial. THAT IT IS A FACT.

So face up to it and admit it.

Bush/Cheney and Powell LIED about WMD.

Kerry is not.

You can't even admit it so that means on some level you know it's wrong.

[Maedhros]

75. They are both overstating their case

in an attempt to justify military action.

Obviously not exactly the same, but from the same playbook. Presenting very weak evidence as proof positive.

[Just Saying]

79. In what way is Kerry overstating?

Please be specific.

Bush/Powell didn't overstate-they flat out lied! They used "evidence" that had already been discredited to march us to war. I remember being at work listening to Powell speak to the UN and knowing he was lying to them. Lost all respect for him at that moment.

I don't believe Obama or Kerry is lying. What evidence would convince you the attack in Syria happened and/or that the regime was responsible?

[Maedhros]

93. Conclusive evidence has not been presented that shows Assad is responspible.

I want to see the results of the UN inspectors' investigation.

At this point we have Russia claiming that the rebels used chemical weapons in July, and the U.S. claiming Assad did so in August. Both sources have to be viewed as unreliable, because both countries have a geopolitical stake in placing the blame in a way that is advantageous to their interests.

Only the results of an independent investigation should be viewed as conclusive.

[Celefin]

78. Yes some DUers make that equation

Infuriating for some, understandable for others.
You got two measured and articulated responses that didn't contain that equation but actual answers to your other question, why not respond in kind and refute their argument if you feel the need to? No need to shout when you're not shouted at.

[RC]

71. Some DU'ers are not claiming this did not happen.

The discussion is between those of us that believe dead is dead, regardless of whether or not they were gassed, turned into a pink mist, made into various sized body parts or had holes violently installed in vital parts of their bodies by bullets or shrapnel.
Those some-of-us believe that all war is bad, no matter how the innocent people are killed. And this includes using depleted uranium, white phosphorus, napalm, agent orange and anything else we use to kill others. Why is gassing separated out as somehow worse, when it is actually is not? It is just another way to indiscriminately kill people. The real answer is to stop all of it. But where's the money in that?

[KittyWampus]

73. Is beating someone to death because they are gay more heinous that just beating someone to death?

There's a thing called "intent".

It's why there are hate crime laws in the USA.

And there are certainly DU'ers saying this wasn't chemical weapons, or it was false flag.

There are MANY posters calling Kerry's speech about Assad forces using chemicals weapons the equivalent of an empty vial and bogus claims about WMD in Iraq.

[RC]

82. Scatter shot.

The closest you got was #3. Have some proof?

[dionysus]

126. there were a *few* posts saying the "dead kids" were drugged for the photo.

also some posts saying it was "the jooos"\nato gassing people, or rebels purposefully gassing themselves. the crazy is alive on DU.

[Scootaloo]

162. What, is this sort of claim suddenly a problem?

Come to I/P. We have a cottage industry of posters claiming that no dead Arab is ever actually dead, or that if they are it's because their parents murdered them. 'Cause you know, Arabs are a child sacrificing death cult - a claim that gets you rightly banned when you say it about Jews, but never when you say it about Arabs.

Point is, DU - and very clearly its admins - have been nothing but tolerant and accepting of this exact claim for years. Is it suddenly a problem now? Is it suddenly offensive now? Why suddenly take umbrage at such a claim, when for so long it's been happily accepted in this community, all the way up to the very top? It's I suspect only because people are using these dead children to justify killing even more Arabs.

Of course those children are dead, and thousands more like them besides. And it's fucking grotesque that anyone would come up with a claim like "oh, they're acting! They're drugged! They did it to themselves!" But... that's the sort of claim towards Arabs that I've come to expect on DU. Thanks for arguing against it, honestly... but it'd be nice if it weren't just for this "special occasion."

[dionysus]

192. sorry man, i've never seen it before.. i stay out of I/P usually.

[Scootaloo]

193. I don't blame you

It takes a special brand of masochist to hang out in there.

And just so you know I wasn't berating you, personally.

[dionysus]

198. cool.

[ctsnowman]

155. Exactly!

[IL Lib]

107. +1 n/t

[NealK]

204. I find it sick that you're rooting for an attack that will likely kill many more people.

[ohheckyeah]

59. And that warning does what we one has already scrolled down the

page?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

88. I guess that means we must kill. Right?

[bvar22]

94. ...and HOW many children did WE kill in Iraq?

..and HOW many children are you willing to kill in Syria under the pretext of stopping the killing of children.

I've got photos that deliver an emotional punch too,
but I won't use them for partisan reasons.

[fascisthunter]

128. as if you really cared

if you did, you'd wanna know who did it.

[Marr]

139. Good thing our cruise missiles and drones are child safe. /nt

[MyNameGoesHere]

147. Assad us a lightweight when it comes to killing babies.

USA! USA! USA! We are number one.

http://goo.gl/qnFPgv

So next time Assad should learn from the masters of disaster.

[L0oniX]

170. I'm sure you will post pics of the innocent dead from a US attack too.

[libdem4life]

194. But where is the incubator cord outlet? Warning...we're not idiots.

[FirstLight]

3. glad I don't have TV

I just get the reviews here...but I already knew he would be that way. disgusting

[stillwaiting]

4. Kinda feel a war/distraction is needed so they can fast-track/pass TPP which is a

MASSIVE corporate coup d'etat.

It really is stomach churning just how bad the TPP is, and I think they definitely need cover to pass it this fall.

Of course, any war seems great for the MIC and its interests.

[JRLeft]

9. ^This, what about the previous deaths before, this so called chemical attack?

5000 a month over a 2 year period.

[Ocelot]

41. +1: Distraction is exactly what it is

Sickening beyond belief that any President would want to bomb a country to bits and cause exponentially more children to suffer just to take the heat off his corporate fat-cat friends.

[Skidmore]

92. So "they" just got on the phone with their good buddy,

Assad, and told him to line up a few missiles loaded with chemicals and point them towards locations with the most children present? Was that how it worked?

[99Forever]

154. Ah yes...

.. the good ol' belittle anyone who sees thru the evil shit 1%ers do tactic!

Bravo! Well played, tool.

[Skidmore]

159. Sometimes shadows are just shadows.

I will remain a skeptic but not become paranoid.

[99Forever]

167. Having watched the reality of what ...

Last edited Sat Aug 31, 2013, 11:59 AM - Edit history (1)

... the scum that have taken over our government are capable of doing, you had better get "paranoid" sister, 'cuz "they" won't hesitate to stomp you just like the rest of us grapes the moment you become inconvenient to them.

[Skidmore]

174. Wow! That's a whole lot of assuming you are doing about someone

you meet in passing on the internet. First of all, this "brother" is a housewife and grandmother in the heart of the Midwest. Second This housewife and grandmother has done a lot of living in many areas of the world. Third, I don't identify with grapes while it appears that you do. Paranoia brings fear and fear clouds the mind. People become reactionary out of fear and reactionism looks to the past continually. When you are looking backwards continually, you will never be able to establish progressive ideas. This is the problem I have with some of those who label themselves "progressives" now.

I am a liberal and have been one for all of my adult years. I have never forsaken my liberalism or sought to hide behind any other label because I couldn't own my own beliefs. I carry with me a set of ideals but do not write off others when theirs are not 100% enmeshed with mine because living with many others has taught me that there is much good in most people and we should always be seeking to tap that good. It has never been my first inclination upon meeting others to not hear them out or to assume that they are enemies at the get go. And, yes, I believe that you return to the basics in times of confusion. What makes sense.

To me the focus right now should be on breaking up the Koch brother's takeover. For years on DU I kept positing that there was a hostile takeover of the government not unlike the hostile takeovers we saw in corporate mergers. Common sense indicated that if something walked and quacked like a duck, it was a duck. No one would ever respond to those ideas. I'm done talking and I'm done explaining myself. I can look at the world and my nation as well as anyone else and draw conclusions based upon my experiences and the information available to me. The truth always lies between the absolutes and time usually bears that out.

[99Forever]

180. My previous post updated..

... to reflect your biggest bitch with and I stand behind the rest of it. Period, save your browbeating sermons for someone else.

[Skidmore]

181. Very creative way to name call.

[99Forever]

185. Excuse me?

What bloody "name" did I call you?

Very "creative way" to try and silence opposing opinions.

[boomer55]

7. new boss same as the old boss. n/t

[G_j]

11. They are all pod people now

[ProSense]

12. Secretary John Kerry: No plan for war.

His speech was clear, and he laid out the process for making a decision. He said any response would not be open-ended. It will be nothing like Afghanistan, Iraq or Libya, and it will not involve war. No troops.

He did not confirm a limited strike.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023563410

Kerry did not give "Colin Powell's speech."

[1-Old-Man]

14. Horseshit. His entire speech was a call to war

You only heard what you chose to hear. One sentence in a speech that runs contrary its entire bent is a meaningless sentence.

[avaistheone1]

18. I agree.

Play those funky war drums white boy.

[libdem4life]

195. That just made me feel really, really old.

[ProSense]

23. No it wasn't n/t

[spanone]

22. people hear what they want to hear.

[Celefin]

26. When did people get the idea that bombing a sovereign country's military isn't an act of war?

That's insane. But then I'm old-fashioned.

[zeemike]

53. We live in a time when words can be redefined

in any way that suits your POV.
So in this case, it is not a war unless there is a full army with boots on the ground...and we are spoused to believe it and STFU.
Meanwhile the bombs in this non war will kill thousands and it don't count.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

45. No plan for peace, either.

[ctsnowman]

151. That IS the plan

can't cut back on the MIC now.

[woo me with science]

121. Donald Rumsfeld: "It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months"

"I can't tell you if the use of force in Iraq today would last five days, or five weeks, or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that."
--Donald Rumsfeld, November 14, 2002

"It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months"
-- Donald Rumsfeld, February 7, 2003

"I think it will go relatively quickly. Weeks rather than months."
-- Dick Cheney, March 16, 2003


Source: The War in Quotes, by G.B. Trudeau, p. 40-41 Oct 1, 2008

[SwampG8r]

141. serious question

do you believe that absent the threat of actual invasion assad will reform?
he will just hunker down and wait out the missiles and then business as usual i would think
or worse he will appeal to his allies to help him and they will so no loss to assad
i just don't see what the point is other than shooting off rockets if we take a ground attack off the table now

[phantom power]

13. "no matter how cynical I get, I can't keep up"

[Hydra]

16. Truer words... n/t

[Celefin]

21. +1000

[Catherina]

39. +1. How I feel too. I thought I was too cynical but they continue to astound me n/t

[Raksha]

118. In the context of international politics, there is no such thing as "too cynical." n/t

[Catherina]

188. +1. "I'm an idealist without illusions" - JFK

when Jackie Kennedy, during their courtship, asked him to define himself.

[Raksha]

196. I guess that would describe me too - "an idealist without illusions."

This is a note I posted on Facebook earlier, in response to a friend who said "I guess I place more credence in our government than you do."

I give our government no credence whatsoever...NONE! I can't afford to. Although it isn't even "our government" exactly but the globalists who pull their strings, who are the real power behind every throne, who are the true culprits. I have found that I can predict their behavior fairly accurately if I assume they will act from the most destructive and inhuman motives I can imagine. In other words, if I assume they are the embodiment of pure evil, or the Christian devil as our mutual friend Allan would say, I am right more often than wrong. Yes, I'm a card-carrying tinfoil hat conspiracy freak. I thought you knew that by now.

The context was a link I posted (several links, actually) to a story claiming that the Saudis, and specifically Prince Bandar who is now the Saudi head of intelligence--supplied one rebel group with chemical weapons without telling them what they were.

Somehow that story hasn't shown up on DU yet, or at least I haven't seen it if it has.

[Catherina]

197. Oh, you mean the story where the father was saying his son died in a tunnel

transporting 'tube-like structures' and 'huge gas bottles' from Saudi Arabia? The callousness doesn't surprise me.

It's all over twitter. Along with videos of the interviews. I'm sure the UN has plenty of testimony too so the news will eventually filter to the more honest media outlets. I hope it won't be too late by then with the rush we're in.

[Raksha]

199. Yes, that's the story I mean. I've been doing what I can to spread the word on Facebook. n/t

[NRaleighLiberal]

51. +10000 n/t

[questionseverything]

24. this is the problem with our govt lying to us

about the nsa...kerry kept saying "our intelligence community" and every time it made me gag a little....how do they think we can believe anything that comes out of clappers mouth or his agency?

a lot of folks with good reason wonder if this isnt cia bs

another problem is,even if what govt says is true is there are still no good solutions...bombing will only affect innocents

[avaistheone1]

206. You are right on all counts.

After all the NSA bulls**t, how can Kerry expect the people of this country are going to want to start throwing bombs at Syria?

Yup, no good solutions. Best to stay the hell out of it.

[MisterP]

25. I remember '04

when the Establishment's main points became "complaining about the candidate's right-wing choices endangers the left-wing policy he'd bring," "it's immoral to disagree with the designated candidate, ever," and "the tiny LW minority causes all problems in the world"

[blm]

27. Are you sure Powell worked 8 yrs for a diplomatic solution in Iraq first?

I know Kerry had been doing exactly that since 2005. And taking the hits from the war hawks and neocons who became angry that Kerry took away the Syria war they wanted.

Surprised that so many of you who think you're informed' know so little about what's been going on in Syria the last 8 years.

[MNBrewer]

50. Solution to WHAT in Iraq?

[blm]

52. To whatever they said Saddam was doing in Iraq.

Point being that Kerry has personally been working towards diplomatic solutions in Syria for the last 8 years in order to PREVENT war in Syria that neocons and war hawks have been angling for since 2005.

Big difference when you put it all in context.

[MNBrewer]

54. SO what "solution" has been pursued in Syria? for 8 years....

Citations?

[blm]

77. My gawd...you mean you NEVER KNEW THIS?

You're just paying attention now and judging Kerry because you THINK you know what's been going on?

Read this thread. I posted some links to another skeptic.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3562064

[MNBrewer]

83. Assad was never under threat of attack by the US

Sec. Kerry wasn't "preventing" anything remotely like a war, e.g., our attacking them. Only since the Syrian uprising has it even been discussed (outside of Neocon circles). Now that chemical weapons have supposedly been used it gives a pretext for us to attack.

The idea that Kerry has somehow been preventing what we're about to do for 8 years is beyond laughable.

[blm]

116. You're wrong. You don't know anything about Syria

and you're apparently too precious to bother studying further.

[MNBrewer]

138. No

you're peddling bullshit

[blm]

161. You're apparently incapable of comprehending what

Last edited Sat Aug 31, 2013, 12:09 PM - Edit history (1)

you read about the US-Syria dynamic of the last decade. Or...you never read any of it in the first place...and....trash comments are SO much easier...you don't even have to engage your brain....do you?

[cali]

177. utter codswallop inspired by your deep devotion to Kerry.

[blm]

182. utter ignorance inspired by those too lazy to study US-Syria issues

of the last decade, and certain that their weak search into recent events gives them all they need to know to argue their dug in position.

[treestar]

101. Yeah what is disgusting is thinking

they know more than Kerry - they can at least listen first, or respectfully disagree, but they always choose attack mode when it comes to Democrats.

[delrem]

120. Agreed. That argument was first used by W's supporters, but it works as well here.

I think the following is required, in this neo-neocon spring.

[Carolina]

123. Well we were right about Iraq

We weren't like Kerry who was for it before he was against it, who callously voted for IWR and who knows damn well that the US has used chemical weapons - napalm, Agent Orange, white phosphorous and more - when it suits its purposes. Neither he or this country have any moral standing.

[treestar]

150. I don't believe that whatever we did 40 or more years ago

prevents us from having any Moral Standing, whatever that is. We don't have to just allow others to do awful things because we once did somewhat bad things.

Iraq - there was no proof there, here there is. In fact anyone for intervening in Iraq based on Saddam merely having WMD should be even more strongly for it here, where they were used.

All of this is to avoid the question, do we really just let this go?

[Carolina]

160. "Whatever we did 40 years ago..."

matters, because this country has not changed and because past is prologue and because those who don't study/review/learn history are doomed to repeat it. This country and Kerry have no moral standing on killing civilians whether with gas or bullets or bombs.

It's time to focus energy, resources and manpower on cleaning up our own house, PERIOD!

[treestar]

164. So we let Assad get away with this?

That's the real question.

There is no one in Washington launching chemical weapons into any part of the United States. So we have Moral Standing there.

What about other countries? Should the UK just let this go?

What if Assad continues to do it then? Not our problem right? No blaming the US for it, right?

[Carolina]

189. Oh puhleeze

We let ourselves get away with "it" everyday. We kill and provide the tools of death to others everyday. Guns, bombs and chemicals of assorted varieties...

Spare me your line in the sand with Assad

[treestar]

190. We have not released such a chemical weapons attack as that

So he should just get away with it?

And when it happens again, no blaming the US right?

[Carolina]

191. Really?

You are willfully blind then to this country's recent history of supplying chemical weapons to Saddam then turning a blind eye when he used them against Iran and Iraqi Kurds in 1988.

Not to mention, as I stated up thread, it's history of using napalm, white phosphorus, depleted uranium (in Iraq, too and recently)...

Puhleeze, spare me the tripe about us doing something to them before they do something to US... it's so Bushian and so wrong. Sounds like "Iraq, the next step..."

And all it means, as I have also said before, is more death and destruction

Bye, bye... No sense responding to your Bushian mentality any longer

[NealK]

205. "So we let Assad get away with this?"

We let him get away with what, exactly? So far there are no proof that it was him who used chemical weapons, the U.S government admitted it. The British dumped the U.S because they know that this whole story is crap. It's all about oil, again. Nothing to do with anything humanitarian. Humanitarian strikes? give me a fucking break. Bombing Syria will accomplish nothing positive, only more civilian casualties, lots of them.

[delrem]

119. All while Hillary was leading a "Friends of Syria" campaign. uh huh...

[blm]

156. Hillary was one of the war hawks Kerry was angering

as he developed a diplomatic relationship with Assad.

I find it interesting how little so many of you know about US-Syria relations,

[delrem]

176. well she ain't angry now.

[blm]

183. She will be if they don't have a full-scale war.

.

[tomp]

146. wow! and here is kerry to the rescue...

...what a wonderful COINCIDENCE that the man with so much knowledge of syria is made secretary of state just in time for a war there! who could be more credible? and a DEMOCRAT no less (we all know how anti-war they are). it's almost enough to make one think there is a divine hand at work here (or some kind of hand).

so, beyond the sarcasm...i have to admit i'm not up on the details of this, but i assert: i don't have to be. that is because i proceed from long established principles: 1) war (boots-on-the-ground or not) is morally wrong unless one is defending oneself against attack. 2) NO military action by u.s. imperialism is for the good, EVER. No person of conscience or political understanding can support u.s. imperialism (if you're going to deny the existence of u.s. imperialism, or any other form of imperialism, we have nothing to talk about). whatever is going on in syria (or anywhere else in the world), u.s imperialism has been a major player in creating the conditions we see today.

there you have it. if one's "in depth" knowledge doesn't include and proceed from that, one is off track. ergo, kerry is off track.

[blm]

158. Your depiction is inaccurate.

.

[tomp]

202. kinda weak on the follow through there, eh? nt

[Carolina]

163. Touché tomp

Kerry is such a tool, but I think many of us realized that after his morally bankrupt IWR vote. He lost his moral compass ages ago, moving up the political ladder and marrying the uber rich republican Mrs. Heinz

He's a 1%er now and has been for quite some time

[mojowork_n]

28. Our security agency is paying the salaries of "Free" Syrian Army fighters...

...in a coordinated sponsorship program. The Saudi and Qatari governments
are the other sponsors.

It's not as if the U.S. isn't already FULLY committed to the Sunni Islamist side,
and we're just now reacting to forestall the senseless death of more innocent
civilians.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/08/30/why-syria/

According to a Wall Street Journal report, there are more CIA operatives at the Jordan base than Saudi personnel. The same report says, since early this year, the CIA is paying salaries to top fighters in the Free Syrian Army, the key western-backed anti-Assad force. Earlier this year, Europe lifted a ban on supplying weapons to the rebels. It was followed by President Obama’s decision to send weapons to the anti-Assad troops.

[RDANGELO]

30. Powell was arguing for an inavsion and occupation in a country where no one was asking for any help.

In this case, I hope they are just looking for ways they can save some peoples lives with limited involvement.

[MNBrewer]

85. very few lives will be "saved" by our actions

When this all falls apart the religious minorities will suffer. Christian and Alawite ethnic cleansing for sure.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

31. Looking for someone with integrity? Has Al Franken weighed in yet on Syria?

[dflprincess]

125. "Franken now says Obama has authority to launch air strikes without congressional

approval, and he supports a military strike to punish Syria for allegedly using chemical weapons on its own people. " (this is per Minnesota Public Radio).

(Of course, Al originally supported the war in Iraq but changed his mind before he ran for Senate, knowing that that position would not play well with the DFL and that his competition for the endorsement, Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer, had always opposed the war and was the more progressive candidate.)

Al's position did not get a very good response from the public at the Minnesota State Fair and reports from the DFL booth are that support for military intervention is not popular with DFLers.

Of course there are a few like the woman I spoke to in the booth yesterday who told me that this was different than Iraq because before Iraq the CIA was lied to and this time they aren't being lied to. She also, with a smile, told me that Hillary supports intervention - like that would convince me.

I'm sure Al, like every other elected Democrat, figures we'll have no choice but to vote for him. As Nelson-Pallmeyer pointed out "Franken's position will alienate a significant number of Minnesota voters," he said. "They may vote for him, but they won't work hard for him."

And it will probably affect his fundraising efforts with the rank and file.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

184. Oh good. First he supported the NSA's spying, then wanted to reform it after getting push-back from

the public.

Now, if we have another Middle-East war with his blessing, maybe he'll utimatly say that he wants to reform that.

[DeSwiss]

32. You can save the seeds.

- The rest will have to go.........

K&R

[geckosfeet]

34. A well thought out and considered response.

What would you have said?

Syria violated an international agreement that has been in place since the end of WWI. Is that not worth speaking about?

[1-Old-Man]

56. "Speaking about" and calling for war are not the same things

And if you had watched and listened to the speech you may have noticed that in the end he expounded on the notion that every evil dictator in the world will now feel embolden to spit in our face and that this nation can not stand to lose its reputation (whatever in hell that is supposed to be).

I would not accept that excuse, that our reputation might be damaged if we did not fight, from a fucking 12-year-old.

[geckosfeet]

108. I did not hear anyone call for war. He said "a response".

Again, what would you have said?

I can see what you are saying right now. And I don't think a secretary of defense would try to make those arguments.

I agree in principle - war should be avoided. But gassing a thousand innocent civilians - over 400 children - and you want to just look the other way?

[brooklynite]

35. Why is everyone being so subtle?

You just called Secretary Kerry a liar. You just accused the Obama Administration of fabricating evidence. You just said there's no difference between the Obama Administration and the Bush Administration.

Embrace your anger with pride.

[Fuddnik]

37. I still curse the day I went to work for his campaign.

[Carolina]

124. I hear ya

I cannot even stand to hear him give a speech any more.

[whatchamacallit]

40. Yep, deja fucking vu

[flpoljunkie]

42. Kerry did not lie, but he did not answer why bombing would make things better--either for the people

of Syria--or for the entire region.

And, what comes next?

[Efilroft Sul]

47. To save the Syrians, we must bomb the shit out of them.

Maybe the United States should look into getting civilians out of the country and placing them somewhere safe.

[RC]

80. Like Iran?

Who's next on the list after Iran?

[JEB]

112. If Israel wanted to be a good neighbor and promote peace

they could offer refuge for civilians. I won't hold my breath.

[Efilroft Sul]

129. Like here, or any other country that wants to help in such an operation.

Coalitions don't always have to be built for war.

The extraordinary crime against humanity, as Kerry alleges the Syrian regime of committing, deserves an extraordinary response. Would the Syrian regime dare attack a humanitarian effort? I don't know. What I do know is that things would go poorly for the Syrian leadership after that. They should beware of the audacity of stupidity.

Getting the civilians airlifted out to safety also allows everyone to save face. It won't be easy; preserving the greater peace never is. But if the United States is committed to the overall safety and welfare of Syria's people, it should explore such an option. For more war, yet another war in which we have no real interest, will otherwise come upon us all too easily.

[Efilroft Sul]

137. RC, whoops!

I originally read your post as suggesting Syrians be sent to Iran. Now that I've reread this thread, I think you meant that the United States will bomb the shit out of the Iranians after the Syrians to bring them our brand of freedom.

My bad. It's late for me.

[KG]

44. dear friends - please disabuse yourselves of the notion the dem party is some sort of peace party.

they've always been has ready to drop bombs as the other guys.

[MNBrewer]

49. I suppose it's another "slam dunk"

[Arcanetrance]

55. I hate to piss in everyone's cheerios peace is a great idea it's a noble idea

But there are times one must take a stand for example the use of chemical weapons on a civilian populace. Yes America has done some bad and that should be addressed but this idea of peace at all costs in the end does nothing but get everyone killed. I haven't made up my mind on supporting military action in Syria. But I'm not going to close my mind the facts this is a complicated situation and has no black or white options

[Skittles]

63. the whole world should take a stand

why just America?

[Arcanetrance]

69. It shouldn't be but we can't even get the UN to unite in condemnation

[1-Old-Man]

67. Balderdash.

This nation is not threatened by Syria, it never has been and never will be. And feigning false outrage at this atrocity while ignoring a myriad of others is simply disingenuous. And that is the very best I can say about this outrage.

[Arcanetrance]

70. I'm not ignoring anything and my outrage isn't false

It outrages me when America uses drones against civilian targets.

[MNBrewer]

86. Peace is nice, in "theory", but sometimes a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do...

[Arcanetrance]

89. Wow yeah cause that's what I said

Peace is nice I would prefer peace to war any day of the week. But the world isn't this idyllic place where we can all skip happily together with rainbows and bunnies. Sometimes military force is necessary. The purposeful targeting of a civilian populace with chemical weapons is one such time. This isn't like Iraq where there's no proof here there's ample proof.

[MNBrewer]

91. Is there ample proof?

SO you know who used that gas? You know what will happen to the country once it falls apart? You know that there will not be ethnic cleansing of the Christian and Alawite minorites? Or, failing that, you have a plan for whom to bomb once the ethnic cleansing starts...?

[bvar22]

99. "Ample Proof" ???!!!!

"This isn't like Iraq where there's no proof here there's ample proof."[/font]

Why don't you provide some links to this "ample proof"?
...because I haven't see ANY.

[L0oniX]

171. Don't be leaving the women out of this...

[treestar]

102. +1

And for that you will be called a warmonger.

[The_Casual_Observer]

61. Just like the Iraq invasion, they don't want an investigation of the gas thing to get in the way

of a good war. It's another rush job. It's been ten years, long enough to replay the old con.

[sarcasmo]

66. It's like the movie Ground Hog day.

[RC]

84. +1

And we are having the same trouble connecting the dots.

[markiv]

74. Now all presidents are George Bush

reminds me of a scene from demolition man 'now all restaurants are taco bell'

[markiv]

76. 'Who wants to be the last man, to die for interventionism'?

if i may paraphrase the younger Lt Kerry

[polynomial]

81. Stand down in Syria

Listening to John Kerry talk about how the Arabs are condemning this gas chemical stuff going on in Syria. Well how about that, O.K. folks lets get those upset Arabs together. We know the Arabs are very angry we will have a hard time holding them back from going in to solve this difficult problem.

Yes America even though those Arabs live right around the corner from Syria Americans knows the total Ernst desire to jump into a Toyota pickup loaded with machine guns and gas masks are shovel ready to build safe bunkers or administer anecdotes leaping into action to explode on the war effort.

Yes, those angry Righteous Islamic stereo fidelities, the Rehab of Jihad free market oil profiteers. Yes, those Arabs of fortune, the Carlyle Cheney/Bush bot’s should and could join hands with Americas very own mercenaries, everyone getting two hundred grand a pop.

Only one caveat we the people would like squads of nineteen Arabs to every one mercenary. Good balance and America’s lucky number, we are sure it will crash onto every compound we aim for, Bush and company held the door open before might as well do it again.

Or maybe just air drop some gas masks and medicine with thousands of leaflets mapping to the nearest clinics for medical treatment.

Sound ridiculous, yep, so does giving them gas masks or medical supplies. Too big to fail huh.

What the heck kind of gas is it anyway, did America sell it to them? Probably one of those secret derivative deals. place your bets, before the bail outs.

Where's the beef? Or the Red Cross!

[blkmusclmachine]

87. 1 Party, 2 Faces

[DhhD]

90. Shock and Awe after the 4 day initial bombing of Baghdad is illustrated by the same bunch trying to

convince the World to go to War in the Middle East to save Israel, Iraq, I mean, Syria.

http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2003/November%202003/1103shock.aspx

[MNBrewer]

98. The "smoking gun/mushroom cloud" approach was evident.

also trying to say that if we don't punish Assad then Iran will develop nuclear weapons is disingenuous.

[forestpath]

104. K&R

[idwiyo]

105. K&R Thank you.

[stevenleser]

110. Even though I am against striking Syria, I totally disagree with this characterization.

There were no WMD in Iraq. Period. At the time Colin Powell gave that speech, the UN Weapons Inspectors had been on the ground in Iraq for two months and had searched almost all suspected sites and had found nothing.

That stands in stark contrast to a situation where there has been an actual chemical attack.

I still think Secretary Kerry and the administration are wrong for leading us in the direction of a military intervention, but the two situations are not remotely similar.

[JEB]

111. How low have the mighty fallen.

[840high]

117. Low. Low.

[pangaia]

113. I only heard him on the radio

in my car coming home from work. Holy shit. He sounded like he was having an orgasm..of sorts.. just foaming at the mouth,, I couldn't believe it.
Is this the same guy I once supported?

[woo me with science]

115. K&R

[Rosa Luxemburg]

127. We don't need to do this

I have already posted my solution.

[David__77]

130. Kerry has been a real problem.

Better than Clinton as SOS, but we deserve better, and rightly should have gotten it.

[L0oniX]

173. IMO he is still wimpy and is trying to make himself look worthy of the SOS title. n/t

[greenman3610]

131. right. because there's not a dime's worth of difference between Al Gore and George Bush. right.

[DissidentVoice]

133. Do Obama and Kerry think they have to appear like hardcases?

Are they still fighting the Vietnam-era myth that Democrats are soft on defence, by thinking they have to be "hawkish?"

Everything about this is WRONG.

The UN is not sanctioning it.

Our principal ally, the United Kingdom, has voted against it. Unlike a US President, a British Prime Minister has to abide by the decisions of Parliament, unless s/he wants to face a potential vote of no confidence.

Without the UK, NATO and the British Commonwealth aren't going to be on board.

This go-it-alone "cowboy" approach was a big part of the reasons (among many) I got so disgusted with George W. Bush.

Is this more "Third Way" bullshit?

[underthematrix]

157. Where is Baby Jesus? You do realize Kerry's speech is

not intended for a US audience? It is just one of the ways countries conduct diplomacy. Well maybe I should modify that. It may have been intended for the neocon inbreds. But they're not really Americans so maybe my first take it right. The truth is you will not be able to understand the purpose of Kerry's speech until it is disclosed in a BOOK long after President Obama is out of office. No one really knows why Bush took us into two wars. I imagine it will be a long time before we get the real skinny on that one too.

[DissidentVoice]

186. Not sure where you're getting this

Do you really think Kerry is going to disclose his reasons for his speech in a book years down the road?

As for Bush...Afghanistan, we were attacked by the Taliban, and Afghanistan was harbouring them. That's why we had NATO and the British Commonwealth on board.

Iraq..."he tried to kill my daddy."

[Melynn]

134. Just remember that Colin Powell voted for President Obama. Twice

Something to keep in mind going forward.

[LaydeeBug]

135. OMG! I just posted this, and it was before I read this. I owe you a beer

for doing a better job at speaking my mind. LOL

[gussmith]

136. Missed Kerry's Speech

Some details would help. In decent English please.

[shotten99]

143. This is a conflation!

I'm not arguing that military action should take place in Syria, but this isn't Iraq.

Likewise, if the neo-cons had actual military expertise and didn't handle Afghanistan and Iraq like dry drunk morons playing a game of Risk in the dark, none of these arguments would be happening now.

[Not Sure]

145. My sentiments exactly

I couldn't have said it better myself.

[great white snark]

152. Well, we got bullshit Obama=Bush comparisons so I guess this is a natural progression.

You're free to disagree but you're not free to rewrite history.

[ctsnowman]

153. I see most

of the usual admin apologists have checked in. Everyone who knows children bleeding out from a wound to the gut is so much more humane than gassing.

[tiredtoo]

168. And yes I agree with 1-old-man

Just saw one of those neocon war mongers on cnn. I tweeted them asking them to tell us why the 100,000 killed using conventional weapons did not raise their ire?
No response and none expected.
More bullshit from our government for sure.
on edit...
Going back to Al Jazeera now.

[dsharp88]

169. I get your point, but it's not the same.

Powell spread lies about WMDs from false information that was cherry-picked by the twisted minds above him.

Kerry told us facts about real WMDs the truth of which is beyond dispute based on the horrific evidence we can all see.

I don't want US troops invading anymore than you do, but these two presentations are, thankfully, not the same.

[Beer Swiller]

175. Your blind faith in Kerry, just because he has a D after his name, is touching, but very misplaced.

You don't know that Kerry isn't doing exactly the same thing that Powell did or, for that matter, that Obama isn't doing exactly the same thing that Bush did. Prime Minister Cameron himself admitted to Parliament that he had no conclusive evidence that the Assad regime used chemical weapons. If he had, he would have presented it to Parliament instead of jeopardizing his position by blindly following Obama's lead, as you are doing right now.

There is no definitive evidence that Assad did this, or even that chemical weapons were definitely used. As Vladimir Putin said, Assad was winning this civil war; he had absolutely no incentive to play a trump card for his opponents(whom, need I remind you include Al-Qaeda?) to cry for Western military intervention. The fact that Obama urged the UN to pull their inspectors out ASAP, before they finished their investigation, is very suspicious.

No, he's rushing willy-nilly into another damned war, and seems determined to do it before the UN can publish its report and before Congress comes back from another one of its ridiculously long vacations. Why the rush?

[stevenleser]

178. That person provided facts for his reasoning and disagrees with Kerry. That is not blind faith. nt

[stevenleser]

172. See my #110. Mischaracterizations never help a cause in the long run. We don't need to do it to

make the case against war here.

[karynnj]

187. Except for the fact that what Kerry says very likely happened -- very likely happened

and what Powell claimed Saddam had was NOT true and he likely knew that. NOTHING that SOS Kerry said is a "lie" - and he did takes pains to qualify his assertions with "highly likely". In fact, I suspect in most of the world, the dispute is NOT with what Kerry said Syria likely did - but what should be done about it.

In the case of Powell, there was no current action of Saddam that triggered anything. It was purely the US providing bogus information of FUTURE dangers. (ie the model they followed was to have a fake version of the Kennedy presentation showing that Russia had placed missiles in Cuba.) Here, Kerry is speaking of a chemical attack that nearly everyone conceded happened and to make the case of why our intelligence agencies see that it was very likely done by the regime.

For those equating Powell and Kerry, it is easy to list things that Powell said that he likely knew were not true. I have seen NO post here that details any charge in the Kerry speech as clearly untrue. I see a lot of - but what about something the US (or others) did, isn't that just as bad? Note that does not make Kerry's summary less accurate. It COULD be used as an argument into what we should do in response - to suggest that even if everything Kerry charges were true, this is not beyond behavior that was not responded to.

An intelligent discussion would be if given what we are pretty sure happened, we can make things better by any attack. THAT is a real question and it is the one that Obama and Kerry are obviously still working on per the coverage of their phone call with legislators.

Some questions, that should at least be considered are:

1) Will a limited attack make further use of chemical weapons less likely - as ANY leader would know there could be a response?

2) What does the country and the world really think of responding militarily to war crimes? Shouldn't that effort come from some international consensus? What happens - when like in Syria, the country in question is a client state of one of the UN permanent members?

Consider the people who spoke of "our" not responding in time to save - the Jews in Nazi days, the various victims in the former Yugoslavia, Darfur, Cambodia (until communist Vietnam did), Rwanda ... etc (far too many to list and I would miss some even if I tried to remember all I know of. What about the 100,000 plus people already killed in this civil war. Should the international community try to stop all civil wars? How and who would do this?

This really comes down to philosophical questions that have raged for at least a century on whether there should be international intervention to stop atrocities. It is a real dilemma when, on one side, there are moral questions of whether you can look the other way when there are crimes of this magnitude, and on the other side, a genuine concern that intervention can often make things worse.

Back to Syria. If the purpose is really a shot over the bow, why not persuade France to push for war crime indictments in the International court that the US does not (but should) belong to. What Kerry presented is a solid case for an indictment against some in the Syrian regime.

3) Should Obama demand a vote from Congress. I think this is the way to go. There is no real reason to rush on this - and if we do nothing ultimately, the longer worldwide and US discussion is even more important than if we attack. This is something worth marking.

[Judi Lynn]

207. It should have been deeply embarrassing for him. What a shame. n/t