Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Stay out of Syria

July 22, 2013

Presidents are right to insist the Pentagon prepare contingency plans to meet any eventuality, no matter how remote the possibility they may be used....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Jul-26-13 6:14 AM

If everyone would call their local congressman it just MIGHT do some good, I did.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-25-13 9:25 AM

Rs, I'm not 'trying' to blaming Dems for anything, history already did that. I repeated those facts and I blame YOU for trying to alter historical facts for your convenience. As I've said, what liberals don't know, they make up hoping nobody will notice, then when caught continue the lie as if repeating lies make will them truths. So, not only can I call liberals like you outright liars, there is nothing you can do about it except try the truth and REAL facts once in awhile instead of constantly projecting and defending stupidity. Then again I could always use the liberal fall-back tactic of insisting you have no say or opinion in the matter because you never experienced the events your talking about. Libs love that one.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-24-13 1:07 PM

MrBoB51, escalation in Vietnam cam well, well after Mr. Kennedy. You're looking for an excuse to pin it on a Democrat. Sorry, but you can't do that here. You're about the only person in the world who would think that.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-24-13 11:09 AM

I am always on the look out for liberals/progressives trying to sneak in false facts and rewrite history if they think they can get away with it and nobody is paying attention. I, for one Rs do pay attention to your 'good facts', you know, the ones you make up, as opposed to 'real facts'. You're only fooling your acolytes, nobody else.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-24-13 10:55 AM

Sorry Rs, Escalation in Vietnam began under Kennedy in 1961 and again tripled in '62, combat forces under Johnson began in 1965 and reached it's peak in 1968 under Johnson. 'Vietnamization' and draw down began in 1969 under Nixon as the result of the Tet Offensive. So please, stop making up and regurgitating 'History' according to liberals and read some REAL history for a change.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-23-13 1:07 PM

Scarecrow: "American involvement in the Viet Nam Conflict began Nov. 1, 1955 under Eisenhower, a Republican." Is there any part of that statement you disagree with?

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-23-13 1:02 PM

Scarecrow57, you forgot the part about Nixon actually ESCALATING the war to never-before-seen levels before gradual withdrawal, probably to take attention away from his extreme malfeasance.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-23-13 12:19 PM

Eschew involvement in all middle-eastern counties save our sole ally, Israel,who is not only the sole democracy in this area, but a provider of vital intelligence. In addition to this proposed policy, let us make ourselves energy-independent so we will not have to make counter-productive decisions regarding some countries which despise us. Drill baby, drill --frack baby, frack -- green baby, green!!!! Let's finally have an intelligent foreign/domestic policy decision which not only treats our country well, but also boosts the economy and creates jobs!!!!

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-23-13 11:49 AM

"American involvement in the Viet Nam Conflict began Nov. 1, 1955 under Eisenhower, a Republican."

Hook line and Sinker!!!! It was in an advisory role which was escalated significantly under JFK and KBJ. Prior to 1960 there were only 900 troops in Vietnam, By 1956 there were 184,000 and by 1968 536,000


1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-23-13 11:03 AM

American involvement in the Viet Nam Conflict began Nov. 1, 1955 under Eisenhower, a Republican.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-23-13 10:13 AM

Ahh Yes, the Korean Conflict and the Vietnam Conflict; both compliments of the Democrats.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-23-13 10:12 AM

RIght on que. Thank god for FOX because the Lame Stream, MESS NBC, and the Clinton News Network (CNN) don't give us this information.

"Dempsey outlines Syria options, including deployment of ‘thousands’ of ground forces"

I'll bet the Obama sheep will approve of this just like they approved of Clinton killing thousands of innocent citizens in Yugoslavia. Mean while, they will continue to slam the "Bush Wars"


1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-22-13 7:54 PM

Re-institute the draft for both men and women who have fought so hard to end discrimination based on gender and our involvement with military actions will end so quickly that your head will spin.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-22-13 4:49 PM

The gulf of Tonkin resolution was meant to prevent further aggression in So. Vietnam but Johnson took it to mean he could escalate US military involvement instead of preventing it, hence the War Powers Act of 1973. As I said, it has been ignored by every President since. One highlight at that time was the dissolution of SEATO, an arm of the UN and the requirement of America to fight wars (like Vietnam) under UN conditions. The point is, Congress never authorized the War in Vietnam, it was called 'Vietnam Conflict' or 'Police Action', with Johnson citing 'Constitutional discretion'. I'm still pretending you're smart dave.

4 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-22-13 12:50 PM

LOL! Vietnam was approved by Congress via SEATO, and then later the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution which was overwhelmingly approved by Congress.

Try again, Bob.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-22-13 12:32 PM

Heheh, libs are now scrambling to find out what I'm talking about, they don't know about Truman, the War Powers Act or anything that happened before they were born. Their indoctrinators posing as educators never bothered to tell them so of course what they don't know, they make up. Get ready for it.

4 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-22-13 12:27 PM

Dave, lets pretend you know what you're talking about. Truman bypassed congress to go to was with Korea. In 1973 the War Powers act was in response to Johnson and Nixons prosecution of war in Vietnam without Congressional decree. Presidents have routinely ignored the War Powers act citing Article II section2 as their authority to send soldiers into combat. So dave, you go on pretending the writer of this article does not know what he's talking about and you do.

3 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-22-13 12:00 PM

Holy crap.

"Congress should make it clear if President Barack Obama decides one day to do so, lawmakers will order him the very next day to withdraw."

First of all, presidents don't invade countries. It takes an act of Congress to do so. But, let's pretend for a moment that he did. Does this moron editor in the corporate office think our military can invade on a moment's notice? Doesn't he remember all the preparation needed to stage the invasion of Iraq? The best a president can do is to provide some air support, like in Libya.

I agree with Scarecrow that we need to keep out of the business of other countries. The only war since WWII that was justified was Afghanistan. We have a giant military/industrial complex with an itchy trigger finger. Maybe it's time to trim their $1 trillion annual budget and close some of those 600 overseas military bases.

7 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-22-13 11:45 AM

We have been sending troops into foreign wars since 1945. We were asked for Help by Kuwait in Iraq. Afghanistan was in response to an Attack, as was WWII.

The United States needs to stop imposing its will upon other sovereign nations.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 19 of 19 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web