(Untitled). . mu If we MT MIME sonnet: Imu was our - THAT? BE GREAT.. but the real question is what about that stapler you i lent you.
x
Click to expand

Comments(242):

[ 242 comments ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#1 - neosword (09/10/2013) [-]
but the real question is what about that stapler you i lent you.
#14 to #1 - toastableduckling (09/10/2013) [-]
"what about that stapler you i lent you"
Wut
#165 to #14 - penismunchernohomo (09/11/2013) [-]
Reference to the meme's origin.
#233 to #165 - toastableduckling (09/11/2013) [-]
"you i lent you"
#243 to #233 - penismunchernohomo (09/13/2013) [-]
Oh, just caught that...
#29 - hueyfreeman (09/10/2013) [-]
UNPOPULAR OPINION INBOUND   
   
We're not invading them, we're trying to help them because their president committed a war crime against them, and 'Merica isn't gonna have that 			****		.    
   
We shall rain liberty and justice for all upon our enemies.
UNPOPULAR OPINION INBOUND

We're not invading them, we're trying to help them because their president committed a war crime against them, and 'Merica isn't gonna have that **** .

We shall rain liberty and justice for all upon our enemies.
#46 to #29 - anon (09/10/2013) [-]
well to be fair there is little to no proof of that and there government denies it.
User avatar #49 to #29 - reaperriley ONLINE (09/10/2013) [-]
Yeah... and Russia just agreed that if we attacked Syria they would back the government. Aka, we attack Syria we are at war with Russia. While I believe that its wrong what they Syria did, do we really want to spend that many American lives and money to have a war against Russia?
#95 to #49 - gerfox (09/11/2013) [-]
No. All experts say that Russia won't go to war over something as small as this. There are a lot of reasons why they won't.

One of their biggest concerns regarding a military operation in Syria is the effect it will have on the world economy. What kind of effect will a prolonged war between the US and Syria have? Also, the US would annihilate the Russian military, which is not quite up to date compared to the US. It's simply not in the interest of Russia. They supply the Assad regime with arms, correct, and they support them - but I think they'll restrict that to just diplomatic channels. It's more likely that for instance Iran will interfere, but I think the US are well aware of this risk - and their allies in the region are also prepared.

However, Obama said just now in a speech they will pursue the Russian diplomatic effort, and put the military actions on hold. For now.
User avatar #149 to #95 - reaperriley ONLINE (09/11/2013) [-]
There are plenty of instances where people, leaders, and nations do stupid things that don't make sense. So just because its not smart to do something doesn't mean it cant happen. But it does decrease the chance of it happening. I just don't want a war.
User avatar #73 to #29 - bladebites (09/11/2013) [-]
I actually agree with you. I was surprised that opinion was so rare.
User avatar #96 to #73 - BIGSEXYISBACKAGAIN (09/11/2013) [-]
Same here. I don't get why so many people are against it. No boots on the ground, no ongoing war, just a precise strike to take out the chemical weapons and deter use of them in the future by Assad and others.
#82 to #29 - bigmanblue (09/11/2013) [-]
sending armed forces into anoter country with the purpose of killing people (which it is its just the plan to kill the "bad" people)

thats not an invasion guys

well what the **** is then?
#86 to #82 - gerfox (09/11/2013) [-]
Too bad an invasion was never on the table, then. They wished to perform air strikes to destroy the huge amounts of chemical weapons possessed by Syria. In fact they have the third biggest stockpile of that **** in the world.
#87 to #86 - bigmanblue (09/11/2013) [-]
i wonder who has the 1st
#91 to #87 - gerfox (09/11/2013) [-]
Russia.
#118 to #29 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
except that our invading them wont help them...what country has the us made more peaceful as of yet...?
User avatar #135 to #118 - hueyfreeman (09/11/2013) [-]
We're not ******* invading them. That is literally the first line of my comment.

We're shooting missiles at them from far away. That's different.
#119 to #29 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
i hope that was sarcasm or else you're incredibly stupid
#146 to #29 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
I'm pretty damn sure that the chemical weapons attack was from Syrian Rebels.

Multiple sources say multiple things, but jesus ******* christ if we don't have beyond shadow of doubt proof about WHO did it. Then no action should be taken at all
User avatar #157 to #29 - urbancohort (09/11/2013) [-]
They got diamonds.
User avatar #171 to #29 - huttero (09/11/2013) [-]
I dont think so, the US only cares about its own interests and if they go to war is because there is something to do in syria that will be profitable for them
User avatar #174 to #171 - swagloon (09/11/2013) [-]
then why is France going along with them?
User avatar #176 to #174 - huttero (09/11/2013) [-]
because they just want a piece of the cake, and they obey US of course
User avatar #179 to #176 - swagloon (09/11/2013) [-]
China too?
#190 to #29 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
oh
yes
Assad used chemical weapons
And Hussein had weapons of mass destruction
because, why would your government lie to you?
if they said they go there to save the people of Syria, they must be right, it is not as if Syria was an ally of Iran and we were interested in making them a puppet state
User avatar #196 to #29 - dapianoman (09/11/2013) [-]
A well-supported and thought out opinion on the internet? oh, no, we're not gonna have that..
User avatar #54 to #29 - thereverand (09/11/2013) [-]
Cause that worked so well before.
User avatar #64 to #29 - pioneermhm (09/11/2013) [-]
Oh, just like they brought Iraq liberty and freedom. Seems legit
#72 to #29 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
LOL AMERICA **** YEAH AMIRITE GAIS

HAVE SOME DEMOCRACY ****** LOLZ

JUST KIDDING, ITS WHITE PHOSPHORUS

HAHAH ENJOYING YOUR LIBERTY?

NOT REALLY, ITS YOUR FLESH MELTING INTO THE CONSISTENCY OF MAYONNAISE, LOL
#61 to #29 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
There Is no "uprising" in Syria. What you are witnessing is a CIA, Saudi and Israeli backed coup. The Western powers are exploiting an age old ethnic tension to effectively destroy Syria as a sovereign state. An estimated 75% of the FSA are foreign militant islamists who believe the Syrian Civil War is the apocalypse, as prophesied by the Qu'ran and Bible.

There is no irrefutable proof that Assad has committed a war crime. In fact, America would be violating every treaty against a war of aggression since 1950 by attacking Syria without a UN mandate.

If the American government were truly interested in pursuing international justice, they would be invading Israel for using ILLEGAL white phosphorus chemical weapons on thousands of Palestinians in 2008.

Protip: Assad offered to destroy all his chemical weapons in 2004, on the condition that Israel do the same. He was of course rejected.
#129 to #61 - zackmorris (09/11/2013) [-]
It's a sad day when anon is the voice of reason.
It's a sad day when anon is the voice of reason.
User avatar #218 to #61 - randomlunchbox (09/11/2013) [-]
If I learned anything in history its that The U.S doesn't follow the very laws we make other countries follow. In other words our government does what it wants because it can and for the most part no country is willing to call us on our crap.
#93 to #29 - DrollHumor (09/11/2013) [-]
I don't claim to know anything, about anything, because trying to find an unbiased and knowledgeable source of information is about as possible as finding dehydrated water.

But from what I gather, we're helping Syria because their president used chemical weapons on them and we're not about to turn a blind eye because it could end up being a holocaust of some sort?
User avatar #115 to #93 - rhiaanor (09/11/2013) [-]
its because:

we signed the pact of no biological warfare, the rebels claimed it was used, the governent denies it, there is no proof either way.

If we go to war it will be retarded because:
an american politician rhetorically offered to take syria's chemical weapons and avert a war, russia renewed the offer, seriously this time, and Syria's government agreed since it was respectfully and not sarcastically
#99 to #93 - gerfox (09/11/2013) [-]
Yeah, what we do know is that chemical weapons have been deployed. The international community wishes to remove these, and the US wishes to take up military actions to do so (while for instance Russia wishes to remove them through diplomatic channels). However, we do not know which side used chemical weapons - and therefore you can't simply bomb someone back to the stone age without justification. The US mean they have this justification, while Russia means no proof points to the current regimes involvement in the use of chemical weapons.
#128 - pseudobob **User deleted account** (09/11/2013) [-]
>Invade

I guess you didn't hear Obama's address an hour ago, even if it actually happens it's definitely not an invasion and yes, this was posted 22 hours ago I am aware that he would not have been able to hear it
0
#133 to #128 - A Pickle has deleted their comment [-]
#134 to #133 - pseudobob **User deleted account** (09/11/2013) [-]
i intended for people to read this part as well
#137 to #134 - A Pickle (09/11/2013) [-]
welp, I'll just delete any records of my stupidity   
   
carry on
welp, I'll just delete any records of my stupidity

carry on
#147 to #137 - nimithecat (09/11/2013) [-]

AFTER ALL THESE YEARS.... FROM MY CHILDHOOD...INTO ADULTHOOD...
I've finally found you...
YOU WERE THE BASTARD ALL ALONG!!!

You were the bastard responsible for the pickles in my hamburgers, even after I always said "No pickles no onions".

This is it, you piece of **** !
You have ****** with me, and ****** with every burger that I've ever ordered from a restaurant for 19 years, and I'm 21 now.

Not so tough now are ya? All green and pickly.....disgusting...

So...
What have you got to say for youself, Mr.Pickle?
#150 to #147 - A Pickle (09/11/2013) [-]
play nice
#154 to #150 - nimithecat (09/11/2013) [-]
Sorry. I know no such thing. Prepare to suffer, Mr. Dil-Pickles.
#158 to #156 - nimithecat (09/11/2013) [-]
Hah! You think a gun is going to stop me?

#160 to #158 - A Pickle (09/11/2013) [-]
I am not familiar with this anime character and his abilities in said anime so... yes?
#161 to #160 - nimithecat (09/11/2013) [-]
Then your defeat will be swift and painless.
After all, what you don't know won't hurt.
#168 to #163 - nimithecat (09/11/2013) [-]
**** ........... I just ate one with onions!
When will this nightmare end?
#166 to #163 - heroicvenom (09/11/2013) [-]
>picks fight with anime character
>expects to win
#167 to #166 - A Pickle (09/11/2013) [-]
I do what I want
User avatar #144 to #137 - pseudobob **User deleted account** (09/11/2013) [-]
it's alright, all people make mistakes and pickles are people too
#140 to #134 - neelix (09/11/2013) [-]
It's called 'Hide selected text' yet you intended for people to read it... Shoulda just bracketed or made it small :>
User avatar #151 to #140 - pseudobob **User deleted account** (09/11/2013) [-]
I was thinking that anyone concerned enough with accuracy to reply with a "22 hours ago" thing would be the kind of person to check these, and also because I always check them anyway. For those who aren't or don't, they don't really need to see that kind of stuff I guess?

But you're right, I should have gone with my second idea, "inb4 22 hours ago", if I wanted to really avoid this.
#148 - saltyfries (09/11/2013) [-]
I read somewhere that thanks to Putin, we may not have to strike Syria at all, because Syria is giving up their chem weapons, not sure if true or not (cuz this is Yahoo News we're talking about), but worth hoping for.
User avatar #153 to #148 - yuukoku (09/11/2013) [-]
The reason the president pressed so hard on the strike idea is because he doesn't want to attack Syria. If he can get public approval for a strike, it'll scare the Assad Regime into handing their chemical weapons over. After that, we don't care what happens.
User avatar #43 - lynchdude (09/10/2013) [-]
*comment about how America is stupid and everyone is fat
#185 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
But war is how we can distract the citizens from out own problems
#12 - anon (09/10/2013) [-]
Tell that to half of the world asking for military aid.
#65 to #12 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
Please.

No one can be this deluded.

You do realize literally no-one but America wants military involvement? Even Britain has rejected it. Pull your head out of your ass you ******* retard.
User avatar #77 to #65 - heartlessrobot (09/11/2013) [-]
**** you, France is going in too. And they'll probably puss out the second **** gets hot.
User avatar #31 - mynameisgeorge (09/10/2013) [-]
I know right, the US is such a ****** place to live.

Being the in the top 8% richest people in the world when you have a minimum wage job must be such a strenuous existence for you.

Only ****** countries gain hegemony, right? I mean, surely every other country let the US gain power because they felt empathy towards it due to its pathetic, horrible, useless government.

All of these edgy 12 year old cunts are right, we need a revolution because the US is such a terrible place to live.

We should be more like Syria and get a strong leader that uses chemicals outlawed by the Geneva Convention on us when we get out of line

Inb4 red thumbs

Seriously, go **** yourself
User avatar #76 to #31 - thebestpieever (09/11/2013) [-]
Yeah, America is pretty much living it. But that still does not give them (or us, now, I guess) the right to intervene in this situation. Nor does it make it any less ill-advised.
#36 to #31 - duudegladiator (09/10/2013) [-]
1. UN Inspectors said "Chemical weapons were used" it did not say who did it.    
   
2. Yes, the U.S. is a terrible place to live in, with its debt rising every day, the US must find wars just to keep a War Economy in place to pay military contractors and such.   
   
3. If you look at all of the state goverments, and the federal government, you can see so much corruption that it may remind you of South American Politics.    
   
4. Look at the rampant increases in Taxation, soon the average American will be on their way to the soup kitchen because they cannot afford their own damn food.   
   
5. Look at HOW MANY Americans are on Food Stamps or Unemployment/Social Welfare checks. It is far too much, and the ratio of workers to non-workers is dying out slowly because of the lack of incentive for new/expansion of business.    
   
You may see America as "Fat, lazy, rich kids who think that they want the newest Iphone 6, but look at the poor, the hardworkers, those people who pay everything and don't want to use credit because it could ruin all that they've worked for   
     
Then look at the Foodstamp receivers and the lazy assholes who collect Welfare checks that are more than those whom work their asses off daily. Some Welfare check receivers get more than a minimum wage worker gets by about 400 dollars or more.  Tell me America is soooo great.
1. UN Inspectors said "Chemical weapons were used" it did not say who did it.

2. Yes, the U.S. is a terrible place to live in, with its debt rising every day, the US must find wars just to keep a War Economy in place to pay military contractors and such.

3. If you look at all of the state goverments, and the federal government, you can see so much corruption that it may remind you of South American Politics.

4. Look at the rampant increases in Taxation, soon the average American will be on their way to the soup kitchen because they cannot afford their own damn food.

5. Look at HOW MANY Americans are on Food Stamps or Unemployment/Social Welfare checks. It is far too much, and the ratio of workers to non-workers is dying out slowly because of the lack of incentive for new/expansion of business.

You may see America as "Fat, lazy, rich kids who think that they want the newest Iphone 6, but look at the poor, the hardworkers, those people who pay everything and don't want to use credit because it could ruin all that they've worked for

Then look at the Foodstamp receivers and the lazy assholes who collect Welfare checks that are more than those whom work their asses off daily. Some Welfare check receivers get more than a minimum wage worker gets by about 400 dollars or more. Tell me America is soooo great.
User avatar #42 to #36 - mynameisgeorge (09/10/2013) [-]
1. You're right, because civilians have access to chemical weapons. And every other country is just dying to invade Syria for no reason.

2. Any economist will tell you debt isn't always a bad thing, you need to spend money to make money. There's such a thing as good debt, debt that you get when you spend it on useful things like buying stock or another country's debt to help you in the long run. Besides, the US debt is a trivial topic since American companies are constantly invested in because everyone knows its economy is strong. The only reason we have a large debt is because we keep buying cheap Chinese labor, which benefits the nation as a whole anyway. And this "war economy" comes with research and development. You know, the stuff that brought us smoke detectors, gps, the microwave, and ARPANET aka the predecessor to the ******* internet.
3. Corruption happens in literally every government :"if you look at it" which is ******* retarded because there aren't statistics for corruption, a lot of Europe is way worse (i.e Italy, Spain, Greece, Helmut Schmidt's East German spy in the 80s)
4. There is no "rampant in crease on taxes" the only increases were on cigarettes and assets to Obamacare
5. HOW MANY Americans are on foodstamps? I'll tell you, it's 15%, And I deal with them every day since I work in retail, somehow most are still able to afford about 100 dollars of items a week and that's after SNAP has been applied. Somehow they all can afford iPhones.

But yeah, you're right, America is **** , go move to Cambodia where they have job security. Or just move to Europe, where they like everyone (that's born in their own respective countries)._ It's not like Europeans are still coming to America, especially not for college, I totally don't know any European immigrants at my university._
User avatar #136 to #42 - undeadwill (09/11/2013) [-]
You know you can make Chemical weapons at home right? Its really ******* easy.
User avatar #155 to #136 - mynameisgeorge (09/11/2013) [-]
Ok, let me rephrase that.

Do you think civilians in Syria have access to massive vats and enough ammonia and bleach to fill them, and then a way to distill that mixture into a gaseous state and have enough people to go around and attack others with it?

Also, it's not "really ******* easy" just because you bought the anarchist's cookbook in 6th grade doesn't mean you're a chemical weapons expert.
#169 to #155 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
They've made improvised mortars and artillery, the UN even said the vehicle used for launching the chemicals was primitive at best, that doesn't exactly sound like something a professional army would use, that sounds like someone made that **** in their backyard.
User avatar #159 to #155 - undeadwill (09/11/2013) [-]
Yes they would.
User avatar #47 to #36 - reaperriley ONLINE (09/10/2013) [-]
While I agree with you man I need to correct you on something. Our debt is actually getting lessened. I think over Obama's first term we reduced our deficit by 500 billion.
User avatar #107 to #90 - reaperriley ONLINE (09/11/2013) [-]
Welp, the reports I had read during the last election stated otherwise. Better check out those sources again.
#120 - jdoggpwns (09/11/2013) [-]
**jdoggpwns rolled a random image posted in comment #80 at Hehehe.... "Booby" ** americas face when
User avatar #130 to #120 - mechaemperor (09/11/2013) [-]
Lol, I posted that.
User avatar #131 to #130 - jdoggpwns (09/11/2013) [-]
Lel, awesome
User avatar #28 - jewsburninindaoven (09/10/2013) [-]
I like that now Obama has considered attacking a country that is massacring civilians people are getting sick of these wars but they blindly support Bush when he wages wars with several countries
User avatar #222 to #28 - randomlunchbox (09/11/2013) [-]
They mostly were mad about tomorrows date. That's why they blindly supported it.
User avatar #37 to #28 - mynameisgeorge (09/10/2013) [-]
Several meaning all 2 you mean? Like the same exact number Obama will have if we do invade Syria?

It's not like people blame Bush for literally every bad thing that has ever happened like a ******* hurricane, right?

I like that now liberals support blindly support Obama for doing the same **** Bush did, and then praise him for it.


User avatar #214 - blacktomcruise (09/11/2013) [-]
just gonna go ahead and not read any comments and go on to say that no one is talking about invading anywhere
#237 to #214 - sageofbattleon (09/11/2013) [-]
Why is it so difficult for people to understand that? Like the US government is proposing missile strikes. Like with MISSILES from boats in the OCEAN. Also, if I see one more person say Obama wants to do this I'm gonna snap. The president is a fancy spokes person, not that his opinion doesn't have some weight, he doesn't make these kinds of decisions on his own
User avatar #173 - swagloon (09/11/2013) [-]
We're not invading
User avatar #162 - crazyeyedbioll (09/11/2013) [-]
Can't fix our own country with military power now can we?
#114 - nubcase (09/11/2013) [-]
I'm pretty sure that one of the factors in maintaining a "super power" status for a country is continuous warfare/ invading other countries

don't kill me
User avatar #105 - sasquatchjc (09/11/2013) [-]
While I agree, I believe many people don't really understand exactly WHY we butt our noses into other country's business; money. When we go to war with another country, factories constantly produce weapons which skyrocket the economy a **** ton. While some might argue more than others on the morality of this like "but are american lives worth it?", it's just the cold truth that war is actually really good for our economy.
#110 to #105 - stupilycouragus (09/11/2013) [-]
isn't war why we're in 13 trillion or so in debt?
isn't war why we're in 13 trillion or so in debt?
#113 to #110 - iftheshoefits (09/11/2013) [-]
it is a big factor but not the soul problem
User avatar #112 to #110 - sasquatchjc (09/11/2013) [-]
Nope, our government just likes to use "deficit spending" to hold the economy up BECAUSE there are no wars. It's a stupid system and needs to be heavily reworked, but that's basically why. Not to mention all of the outsourcing that goes on with our major corporations paying pennies to overworked people overseas *coughchina*
User avatar #122 to #112 - trystanvierra (09/11/2013) [-]
*cough* ******* chinks *coughcough*
User avatar #123 to #122 - trystanvierra (09/11/2013) [-]
Does anybody have a Hall's?
User avatar #68 - xkronusx (09/11/2013) [-]
ahem America FUCK YEAH!
User avatar #184 - levelninetynine (09/11/2013) [-]
If some people actually listened or watched politics you would understand why we go to war in the first place. Obama had a hand full when he started his campaign. He has made some mistakes just like every president has but he should still take some credit for taking the plate to make the best decision possible for not just U.S. but humanity as a whole. About 198 countries agreed to sign some kind of document to not use chemical weapons some 11 odd years ago due to the great wars. The Syrian leader has killed 100,000 men, women, and children since August. Multiple countries have warned Syria to stop breaking international laws or they will send troops in. The two biggest Russia and the U.S.
All I hear is "we should stop butting our heads into other peoples business." and " we aren't the world police." and I can't decide if that's ignorance or arrogance but people need to understand what is actually happening. If no one does anything about it soon it will start becoming a trend among more powerful countries and then soon it will happen to us or multiple countries will get together and try to dominate the planet. If our government started killing its own people in very inhuman ways wouldn't you beg for someone to help? Do you let people in your workplace or school do cruel things to a certain group? Someone has to step up in some situations because humanity can only function as a whole.
TL;DR GOOD
#192 to #184 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
We didn't stop israel from using chemical weapons, and we didn't stop Iraq from using them, the US does not give one single **** about chemical weapons.
User avatar #198 to #192 - SumoWamm ONLINE (09/11/2013) [-]
Yes we do, dumb ass.
#201 to #198 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
A nice rebuttal there, if you're resorting to ad hominems this early you've already lost.
User avatar #208 to #192 - levelninetynine (09/11/2013) [-]
Its hard to stop someone from doing something if its already happened. We didn't stop Hitler from gassing Jew's after the fact.
#211 to #208 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
But our strikes are used as a punishment for Assad already having used said weapons, this is just a double standard Israel gets to follow one law while *********** follow another.
User avatar #212 to #211 - levelninetynine (09/11/2013) [-]
We are going after the regime not the civilians and also not using chemical weapons.
#216 to #212 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
I'm aware, i'm saying that the Israel government has used chemical weapons, so if we're attacking Assad for using them we should be attacking Israel for using them, unless like I said, there is a complete double standard.
User avatar #217 to #216 - levelninetynine (09/11/2013) [-]
I'm pretty sure they've stopped using them. They wouldn't be our allies.
#224 to #217 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
You don't let a murderer off just because they're not killing someone at the moment, israel committed a war crime, just the same as Syria.
User avatar #227 to #224 - levelninetynine (09/11/2013) [-]
Anon, Please read the history of Israel from the passed 60 years.
#228 to #227 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
Nothing excuses chemicals weapons.
User avatar #223 to #184 - buttplugmaster (09/11/2013) [-]
Even if you don't look at the human rights issues it's pretty stupid to just say "don't attack no matter what" over this. I hope for a peaceful resolution, I do. But if we say "we won't tolerate this," then we need to not tolerate it. If we don't stand by our word we are broadcasting weakness to the international community in a time we need to be broadcasting strength. It's bad enough that our chief executive officer couldn't make the decision on his own and had to rely on begging congress and the american people. We do need to stay out of other countries business, but not at the cost of what could be our own safety.
User avatar #213 to #184 - osamathemamalama (09/11/2013) [-]
I think this is a good point but it's hard to determine who should take responsibility. This is probably a moot point, but the perspective of the picture rings true to my thoughts. I think after our wars in the middle east, it's time for some self-preservation as a country and time for other people to worry about the world for a while.
#39 - pyrocos (09/10/2013) [-]
Yeah cause leaving alone helpless people to ignorant muslimic dicators is a really cool thing
User avatar #41 to #39 - willdabeast (09/10/2013) [-]
And it's our job to fight for them? No. Nowhere have we agreed that we would protect the middle east from dictators.
#232 to #41 - pyrocos (09/11/2013) [-]
So if you see a kid who gets beaten by a bunch of older kids you just walk by and say "I didn't agree to that" ?
#45 to #39 - reaperriley ONLINE (09/10/2013) [-]
If its our job to save people from dictators then why do cuba, china, north korea and a bunch of other countries still exist? Oh, that's right....
User avatar #57 to #45 - ronyx (09/11/2013) [-]
It's not the job of the USA to save people from dictators, but to enforce international laws. If the US does not do anything, it sends a clear message to all dictators in the world. That message being that ITS OK TO USE WEAPONS LIKE CHEMICAL WEAPONS AND NOBODY WILL DO ANYTHING. Don't be so ignorant, the issue is far more complex than you think it is and you must look at the big picture.
User avatar #58 to #57 - reaperriley ONLINE (09/11/2013) [-]
You know what I see? A war with Russia. Russia just stated that if we attack Syria, Russia will back them up. So we attack a ******** dictator who needs to be wiped from this world, and all of a sudden we have another superpower breathing down our throat. As much as I want the Syrian government punished. I don't see a reason to trust the rebels or go to war with Russia over it.
User avatar #60 to #58 - ronyx (09/11/2013) [-]
You are uninformed. If the US doesn't act, Israel will do so as Syria already sank a submarine from Israel and in retaliation it is suspected that Israel used a tactical nuke on a bunker on syria. You can find the video on youtube of the mushroom cloud. So Israel will attack and Turkey will attack too because they want a piece of the land from Syria. Russia is not stupid enough to go into war, far too many interests from Russia are at stake not only in Syria but globally. Plus Russia already told Syria to turn in all chemical weapons so the US doesn't have the need to attack.
User avatar #74 to #57 - thebestpieever (09/11/2013) [-]
It is not the job of the United States to police the world. And don't have the right nor the duty to go around enforcing justice in the world. Not to mention the more than shady stuff that they do around the world.

Striking at Syria will only keep that negative policy alive. It will cost young men their lives. All for what? For some ill-conceived notion that the US, can and should take actions to stop this kind of thing? News flash: it hasn't worked before. Leave Russia alone, they are not the problem. But you really don't wanna get China on your back, and especially not for a reason as retarded as jingoistic ego from being the policemen of the world.
User avatar #132 to #74 - ronyx (09/11/2013) [-]
First of all, the US doesn't even need to put troops on Syria. Second of all, the us is and has always been the "world police" because it's the only country in the world capable of doing so. Yes, Iraq was a mistake, but we can't look the other way when it's clear chemical weapons were used in Syria. Then you go around saying "leave Russia alone" well my friend let me tell you something. Russia has the power to veto any resolution through the UN and since Russia has a ******** of interests in Syria and they even have a naval base there then obviously any resolution through the UN is impossible. Then you say that you don't want China on your back, please, do you think China is stupid enough to start a third world war? Do you know how much money China makes off the US? do you know how much Chinese crap is sold on the US? Do you think the Chinese are stupid enough to kill the cash cow? I don't think so. Neither are the Russians stupid enough to start a WWIII and Putin will not risk losing his precious throne trying to correct the mistake of Assad for using chemical weapons. The Russians already called for Syria to turn in their Chemical weapons to prevent the US from attacking Assad.

To be honest, you just spew **** without knowing many details and all you do is spread misinformation from assumptions and from your hate towards the USA. I would also love to know what country you are from since you hate the USA so much.
#88 to #74 - kanbabrif ONLINE (09/11/2013) [-]
Syria accepted russias disarmament plan. They are going to put the weapons under international control before russia dismantles them.
www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/09/20139109613395758.html
#180 to #57 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
Pretty sure it's the international communities job to enforce international law, not just the US's. And the US doesn't give a **** about chemical weapons, Israel has already used them and so have countless others.
User avatar #182 to #180 - ronyx (09/11/2013) [-]
I'm pretty sure, any country can enforce international law. The only "international community" is the UN and the UN can't do crap because Russia can veto it. I wish people like you could google **** better.
#188 to #182 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
The point of international law that if it is broken the entire international community enforces it, not just the US, just because Russia isn't sucking the US's dick doesn't mean we just subvert the entire UN. I wish people like you would actually think for a ******* second instead of trying to invade every country on a whim.
User avatar #191 to #188 - ronyx (09/11/2013) [-]
Then there is the Issue of Sovereignty related to international law which reads as follows:

"Practically, sovereignty means that one state cannot demand that another state take any particular internal action. For example, if Canada did not approve of a Brazilian plan to turn a large section of Brazil’s rainforest into an amusement park, the Canadian reaction is limited by Brazil’s sovereignty. Canada may meet with the Brazilian government to try to convince them to halt the project. Canada may bring the issue before the UN to survey the world’s opinion of the project. Canada may even make politically embarrassing public complaints in the world media. However, Canada cannot simply tell Brazil to stop the rainforest project and expect Brazil to obey."

Russia doesn't have to suck the US's dick, chemical weapons are clearly used on Syria and Russia threatened to retaliate if the US attacked Syria. Please tell me how it's a great idea for chemical weapons to be used without consequences because Russia has the power to ve But then in case you didn't know, Russia now wants Syria to turn in all the chemical weapons, how about that huh?
#194 to #191 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
Except there isn't any clear evidence the Syrian government used chemical weapons at all, so saying because chemical weapons were used we just have to attack somebody, anybody is just plain out retarded and irrational, again, think for a ******* second. Russia is vetoing because the US wants to strike one of its allies based on conjecture, and as well it should. We would veto the *********** **** out of Russia if it decided one day, oh Israel may have killed a ******** of people, Russia isn't the bad guy here... for once.
User avatar #197 to #194 - ronyx (09/11/2013) [-]
Then why did Russia practically demanded Syria to turn in the chemical weapons to an international organization to be dismantled? Don't kid yourself thinking that Assad is such goodie and would never do anything like that. Let's remember that he is a dictator that has been in power for decades, let's also not forget that the tactical nuke that exploded on Syria which was possibly launched by Israel caused a very special mushroom cloud that would only be caused by the explosion of a chemical weapons lab.

Really, you should stop trying to convince yourself that Assad would never do such thing.
#200 to #197 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
Russia demanded the weapons because the US was on the edge of their seat to go to war, whether the chemicals were used by rebels or the government russia knew that would be symbolic enough for the US to stop its crusade. And the "evidence" linked above was produced by the same people who said there were WMD's in Iraq, and look how reliable that turned out to be.
User avatar #202 to #200 - ronyx (09/11/2013) [-]
So we're making facts out of assumptions now? Well, since you absolutely have no proof to back up your statements I believe I'm just wasting my time here.

But before I go, tell me something. Is Syria going to turn in their own chemical weapons or the homemade chemical weapons you assume the rebels used? I sure hope the rebels are nice enough to give them to Assad, and oh man those rebels surely fooled the US government and Russia since they think it's Assad's chemical weapons.
#203 to #202 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
I doubt they'll hand over anything, Russia will just go "Oh syria gave us some weapons" just to cool the US off.

And I am assuming, but at least i'm not believing a known inaccurate source.
User avatar #205 to #203 - ronyx (09/11/2013) [-]
And according to you, what organization would be an accurate source?
#206 to #205 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
CIA and government reports about the chemical weapons.
User avatar #207 to #206 - ronyx (09/11/2013) [-]
Man, you just went full retarded or you are trying to troll. Anyway goodbye.
#209 to #207 - anon (09/11/2013) [-]
Ad hominems, looks like your argument is the flimsy one here.
User avatar #143 - IamEllis (09/11/2013) [-]
when bill clinton was in office, there was the same problem with bosnia but instead of invading, he just sent some planes and bombed some areas and it was effective.Obama wants to do the same but with the missles on our ships. Iran is funding much of the syrian gov. activity so it would be a blow to them too
[ 242 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)