Welcome to PatsFans.com

Alert Peta----Alert Peta

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Harry Boy, Dec 8, 2012.

  1. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,073
    Likes Received:
    124
    Ratings:
    +332 / 1 / -9

    Last edited: Dec 8, 2012
  2. Hebeill

    Hebeill Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    1,568
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Last edited: Dec 8, 2012
  3. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,106
    Likes Received:
    216
    Ratings:
    +326 / 6 / -8

    Your link did shock me.

    I cannot believe you guys routinely sit through a 30-second ad video before being allowed to view a video on Brietbart, of all places. Ka-CHING!
  4. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,824
    Likes Received:
    84
    Ratings:
    +187 / 3 / -10

    This is actually an important issue that needs to be addressed by the sane world. We don't have to allow any country to have chemical weapons.

    UK confirms fears over Syria's chemical we... JPost - Middle East

  5. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,073
    Likes Received:
    124
    Ratings:
    +332 / 1 / -9

  6. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,106
    Likes Received:
    216
    Ratings:
    +326 / 6 / -8

    Really? How many troops do we have in Syria? (Or should they just be cops?)

    If not American intervention, who should do our bidding to "not allow" WMD in other countries?

    Here's your basic proliferation problem in chart form.

    CNS - Chemical and Biological Weapons: Possession and Programs Past and Present

    We "don't have to allow" this? Okay. We went a long way toward bankrupting the U.S. just because when we beat down one country, despite verification on the ground and through satellite and aerial monitoring unprecedented in the history of imposed disarmament, we still weren't sure enough that they didn't have any WMD left.

    So what are we going to do about Algeria, Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia... the list goes on. Invade all of them? I hope you don't want to go after the likes of France and China too.

    What the hell does that naive-as-hell statement even mean, that we "don't have to allow" other sovereign nations to develop a military technology that's a century old? You mean we could all say naive crap on bulletin boards, and that would stop them?

    Or do you mean we need to open up a few dozen theaters of operations to actually enforce your preferences?

    How does that statement have anything to do with the known reality on the ground?

    PFnV
  7. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,073
    Likes Received:
    124
    Ratings:
    +332 / 1 / -9

    God bless the Rabbits:

    Here comes Peter Cottontail
    Hopping down the Bunny Trail

    :bricks:

    God Willing Death To Peter Cottontail, God Is Great
    __________________
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2012
  8. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,824
    Likes Received:
    84
    Ratings:
    +187 / 3 / -10

    Hey, I never said I want our troops to go to Syria.

    We've wasted enough lives in that God forsaken land...
  9. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,106
    Likes Received:
    216
    Ratings:
    +326 / 6 / -8

    A vexing problem to be sure. Wish we could "not allow it". It would be many more countries without the chemical weapons treaty. Of course, putting verification teeth into such treaties where international inspectors would comb the countryside looking for such weapons offends our notions of sovereignty, so we'd never go for that. If we did, however, we could get signatories not to trade with non-signatories, and it would mean something.

    Meanwhile, when the UN turned America's Americans With Disabilities Act into an international instrument, we voted it down. Even though we already live under its provisions.

    :ugh:
  10. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,824
    Likes Received:
    84
    Ratings:
    +187 / 3 / -10

    We do that on purpose to show the world we wiil always determine our own destiny and will never allow some world body to tell us what to do.

    We are the leaders...and will never follow. Not in my and your lifetime anyway. I kinda like that.
  11. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,106
    Likes Received:
    216
    Ratings:
    +326 / 6 / -8

    Meh.

    Sounds like you're trying to fill in a hole with a national identity, not like a way to make any progress on problems that cross borders.

    The Constitution, 220+ years ago, lays out how the U.S. adopts and deals with treaty obligations. Every civilized nation has them.

    PFnV
  12. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,073
    Likes Received:
    124
    Ratings:
    +332 / 1 / -9

    Kill The Rabbits

    God Is Great
    God Willing
    Praise God

    Death To The Rabbit
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2012

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>