If the Rethugs had their way, we'd be sending half a million ground groups in there.

[pnwmom]

As a starter.

Shock and awe.

[Laelth]

1. Only if the companies in which they own stock would profit from it.

That said, our involvement is still a good idea, as I explained HERE.

-Laelth

[NYC_SKP]

2. Yup. DU seems to think we are Going To War, same as the last war, yada yada yada.

I seem to have missed the part about a new war.

This is a multi-national coordinated and limited mission, and not a new war.

Also, the message delivers what voters needed to hear in order to vote for Democrats this fall.

Obama didn't give the RW anything to work with.

But DAMN if the left wing isn't having a field day with it.

Amazing, and pathetic.

[Autumn]

3. Maybe we should. Instead of a small measure, go all in.

End it quick and concentrate on what's important, the many problems we have here in our country.

[pnwmom]

5. Unfortunately, I don't think there is a quick solution to this problem.

ISIS isn't sitting on a battlefield, ready to engage with us. They've taken over cities in an area bigger than Maryland.

[Autumn]

9. Shock and awe should fit right in on areas bigger than Maryland.

Since they are that dangerous, go all in.

[atreides1]

10. Interesting

How do we end it quick...and how many on both sides will have to die before the end?

[Autumn]

11. Interesting indeed. How many on both sides will have to die before the end

be it slow or quick?

[leftstreet]

4. If it's so fucking VITAL!! SERIOUS!!, maybe Obama should n/t

[Puzzledtraveller]

6. ding ding

Winner!

[KurtNYC]

7. we did not go to the U.N. Security Council, did not go to Syria's diplomats.

We did not make a case against Assad yet we are going to bomb Syria and topple Assad. Just as we wanted to exactly one year ago.

There is something missing in all this.

[pnwmom]

8. Who says we're going to topple Assad? I didn't hear Obama declare war on Assad. n/t

[KurtNYC]

14. Obama has said it many times. And so did Rumsfeld/Bush/Cheney

2003 -- “Seven countries in five years” Iraq (check), Libya (check), Syria...
http://www.salon.com/2007/10/12/wesley_clark/

2011 -- "Assad must go, Obama says":
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/assad-must-go-obama-says/2011/08/18/gIQAelheOJ_story.html

Aug 2013 -- "Obama: I Have Decided To Bomb Syria"
http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/obama-i-have-decided-to-bomb-syria-but-i-want-congress-to-we#1vneodz

Jan 2014 - "U.S. insists Syria’s Assad is illegitimate and must be ousted"
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/22/u-s-insists-syrias-assad-is-illegitimate-and-must-be-ousted/

[Johonny]

12. I don't know

If Obama asked to do that they would likely thought of a reason why they didn't support it. Obama can't win no matter if he does exactly what they say they want. All I know is the false rhetoric of the GOP. I certainly have no clue as to what they'd really do. For instance they talk a lot about balancing the budget but we know when they have their way... the budget is massively unbalanced. For all the macho talk about another ground war in Iraq or Syria, it isn't clear they wouldn't actually follow the same pattern of moves Obama has made. The fact they seem so angry and yet lethargic to pass spending bills and authorization of force seems to hint to me that they would in fact do exactly what Obama is doing. They hate Obama most when he follows the most likely best action available given the current political climate(see Obamacare). It is always possible they are incredibly stupid, but it is more likely they are lying as usual.

[pnwmom]

13. I was really thinking that if a Rethug were President, that's what would have happened long ago. nt