Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: Palin blasts Syria warmongers - Let Allah sort it out!

  1. #1

    Palin blasts Syria warmongers - Let Allah sort it out!

    https://www.facebook.com/sarahpalin?fref=ts
    LET ALLAH SORT IT OUT

    “So we’re bombing Syria because Syria is bombing Syria? And I’m the idiot?” - Sarah Palin

    * President Obama wants America involved in Syria’s civil war pitting the antagonistic Assad regime against equally antagonistic Al Qaeda affiliated rebels. But he’s not quite sure which side is doing what, what the ultimate end game is, or even whose side we should be on. Haven’t we learned? WAGs don’t work in war.

    * We didn’t intervene when over 100,000 Syrians were tragically slaughtered by various means, but we’ll now intervene to avenge the tragic deaths of over 1,000 Syrians killed by chemical weapons, though according to the White House we’re not actually planning to take out the chemical weapons because doing so would require “too much of a commitment.”

    * President Obama wants to do what, exactly? Punish evil acts in the form of a telegraphed air strike on Syria to serve as a deterrent? If our invasion of Iraq wasn’t enough of a deterrent to stop evil men from using chemical weapons on their own people, why do we think this will be?

    * The world sympathizes with the plight of civilians tragically caught in the crossfire of this internal conflict. But President Obama’s advertised war plan (which has given Assad enough of a heads-up that he’s reportedly already placing human shields at targeted sites) isn’t about protecting civilians, and it’s not been explained how lobbing U.S. missiles at Syria will help Syrian civilians. Do we really think our actions help either side or stop them from hurting more civilians?

    * We have no clear mission in Syria. There’s no explanation of what vital American interests are at stake there today amidst yet another centuries-old internal struggle between violent radical Islamists and a murderous dictatorial regime, and we have no business getting involved anywhere without one. And where’s the legal consent of the people’s representatives? Our allies in Britain have already spoken. They just said no. The American people overwhelmingly agree, and the wisdom of the people must be heeded.

    * Our Nobel Peace Prize winning President needs to seek Congressional approval before taking us to war. It’s nonsense to argue that, “Well, Bush did it.” Bull. President Bush received support from both Congress and a coalition of our allies for “his wars,” ironically the same wars Obama says he vehemently opposed because of lack of proof of America’s vital interests being at stake.

    * Bottom line is that this is about President Obama saving political face because of his “red line” promise regarding chemical weapons.

    * As I said before, if we are dangerously uncertain of the outcome and are led into war by a Commander-in-chief who can’t recognize that this conflict is pitting Islamic extremists against an authoritarian regime with both sides shouting “Allah Akbar” at each other, then let Allah sort it out.

    - Sarah Palin
    Great opinion piece by Palin. Was surprised she hinted the Iraq War was a failure.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Wow, all this time I wrongly assumed she was a big supporter of Israel's security.

    Insight: As Obama blinks on Syria, Israel, Saudis make common cause
    JERUSALEM/RIYADH | Mon Sep 2, 2013 8:52am EDT
    (Reuters) - If President Barack Obama has disappointed Syrian rebels by deferring to Congress before bombing Damascus, he has also dismayed the United States' two main allies in the Middle East. Israel and Saudi Arabia..

    Israel's state-run Army Radio was more explicit: "If Obama is hesitating on the matter of Syria," it said, "Then clearly on the question of attacking Iran, a move that is expected to be far more complicated, Obama will hesitate much more
    - and thus the chances Israel will have to act alone have increased."

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by enhanced_deficit View Post
    Wow, all this time I wrongly assumed she was a big supporter of Israel's security.

    Insight: As Obama blinks on Syria, Israel, Saudis make common cause
    JERUSALEM/RIYADH | Mon Sep 2, 2013 8:52am EDT
    (Reuters) - If President Barack Obama has disappointed Syrian rebels by deferring to Congress before bombing Damascus, he has also dismayed the United States' two main allies in the Middle East. Israel and Saudi Arabia..

    Israel's state-run Army Radio was more explicit: "If Obama is hesitating on the matter of Syria," it said, "Then clearly on the question of attacking Iran, a move that is expected to be far more complicated, Obama will hesitate much more
    - and thus the chances Israel will have to act alone have increased."
    Isn't it a little collectivist to group all Israelis together? Many Israelis, including politicians, believe intervention in Syria would harm Israeli national security...
    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...14#post5207014

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by compromise View Post
    Great opinion piece by Palin. Was surprised she hinted the Iraq War was a failure.
    Is God upset now because Iraq war task He gave to Palin was a "failure" and now Obama is our "national leader" that she refuses to follow:




    Quote Originally Posted by compromise View Post
    Isn't it a little collectivist to group all Israelis together? Many Israelis, including politicians, believe intervention in Syria would harm Israeli national security...
    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...14#post5207014
    Do you agree with that? Would you also oppose US attacking Iran if it is close to getting same nuclear capacity as Israel's?

    I'm sure there will be some Israelis who also oppose US attack on Iran for Israel's security. But majority in israel, Joe Lieberman, David Horowitz, John Hagee, Mccain, Rafael Cruz, Bill Krystal, AIPAC, CUFI and many others would disagree strongly.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by enhanced_deficit View Post
    Wow, all this time I wrongly assumed she was a big supporter of Israel's security.
    What she is, is a opponent of all things Obama. She would love to lead the cheers for this war, but unfortunately she finds herself on the wrong side of the party line this time.

  7. #6
    Account Restricted. Admin to review account standing


    Posts
    28,739
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Quote Originally Posted by cajuncocoa View Post
    What she is, is a opponent of all things Obama. She would love to lead the cheers for this war, but unfortunately she finds herself on the wrong side of the party line this time.
    Nope. This is about WW3. No sane person wants World War 3, aside from Benny Netanyahu, Prince Bendar and the Obama's Fabian Society. If this moron flings cruise missiles in there, all bets are off.
    Last edited by AuH20; 09-02-2013 at 12:32 PM.

  8. #7
    Weren't any of you around in the late 90's/early 2000's?

    Republicans oppose foreign intervention when a Democrat is in office. This is not strange and they aren't coming around.

  9. #8
    Supporting Member



    Blog Entries
    1
    Posts
    2,891
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    Nope. This is about WW3. No sane person wants World War 3, aside from Benny Netanyahu, Prince Bendar and the Obama's Fabian Society. If this moron flings cruise missiles in there, all bets are off.
    Unfortunately, I think a lot more people would be game for a WW3 aside from the yahoos you listed above. Alot of people are going to lose alot of power if the dollar is no longer the petrodollar of the world.
    I have to agree with cajuncocoa on this. If a President Romney was presented with this same issue, your GOP mouth pieces (of $#@!) would be singing a different tune... I mean who would of thought guys like Hannity, and others like him, would be using Ron Paul stances as their talking points. When the GOP had a chance to win the Whitehouse, phrases like blow-back earned you instant condemnation in the GOP rank and file, handed a tin foil hat, and told not to research Thermite anymore.
    Last edited by KEEF; 09-02-2013 at 12:44 PM.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Sola_Fide View Post
    Weren't any of you around in the late 90's/early 2000's?

    Republicans oppose foreign intervention when a Democrat is in office. This is not strange and they aren't coming around.
    You're right. It only makes a difference if we can use this anti-war rhetoric (however insincere it might be) to elect genuine anti-war Republicans into office, including Rand Paul for the presidency. Otherwise nothing will change.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by KEEF View Post
    Unfortunately, I think a lot more people would be game for a WW3 aside from the yahoos you listed above. Alot of people are going to lose alot of power if the dollar is no longer the petrodollar of the world.
    I have to agree with cajuncocoa on this. If a President Romney was presented with this same issue, your GOP mouth pieces (of $#@!) would be singing a different tune... I mean who would of thought guys like Hannity, and others like him, would be using Ron Paul stances as their talking points. When the GOP had a chance to win the Whitehouse, phrases like blow-back earned you instant condemnation in the GOP rank and file, handed a tin foil hat, and told not to research Thermite anymore.
    1.The district is guaranteed to go Republican. (YES)
    2.The voting Record of the incumbent must be extremely treasonous. (YES)

    3.The liberty Challenger must be well seasoned to deliver the message & understand the political game. (YES)
    Let’s Focus on our best opportunities, whether its $$$$$$ or Activism! ~ Donate In Liberty, Don Volaric https://secure.piryx.com/donate/la8DvISN/Committee-to-Elect-Don-Volaric/

  13. #11
    Account Restricted. Admin to review account standing


    Posts
    28,739
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Quote Originally Posted by KEEF View Post
    Unfortunately, I think a lot more people would be game for a WW3 aside from the yahoos you listed above. Alot of people are going to lose alot of power if the dollar is no longer the petrodollar of the world.
    I have to agree with cajuncocoa on this. If a President Romney was presented with this same issue, your GOP mouth pieces (of $#@!) would be singing a different tune... I mean who would of thought guys like Hannity, and others like him, would be using Ron Paul stances as their talking points. When the GOP had a chance to win the Whitehouse, phrases like blow-back earned you instant condemnation in the GOP rank and file, handed a tin foil hat, and told not to research Thermite anymore.
    The U.S. is in no condition to fight WW3. No manufacturing capacity on the mainland. Debt galore owed to questionable parties. Military forces are both physically and mentally wasted. Universally hated by a sizable portion of the globe. WW3 is a veritable death sentence.
    Last edited by AuH20; 09-02-2013 at 12:59 PM.

  14. #12
    she must have sold all her military defense stocks.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    The U.S. is in no condition to fight WW3. No manufacturing capacity on the mainland. Debt galore owed to questionable parties. Military forces are both physically and mentally wasted. Universally hated by a sizable portion of the globe. WW3 is a veritable death sentence.
    It doesn't matter to our politicians as long as they have the love of Israel.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by enhanced_deficit View Post
    Do you agree with that? Would you also oppose US attacking Iran if it is close to getting same nuclear capacity as Israel's?

    I'm sure there will be some Israelis who also oppose US attack on Iran for Israel's security. But majority in israel, Joe Lieberman, David Horowitz, John Hagee, Mccain, Rafael Cruz, Bill Krystal, AIPAC, CUFI and many others would disagree strongly.
    I'm talking about Syria, not Iran.

  17. #15
    Supporting Member



    Blog Entries
    1
    Posts
    2,891
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    The U.S. is in no condition to fight WW3. No manufacturing capacity on the mainland. Debt galore owed to questionable parties. Military forces are both physically and mentally wasted. Universally hated by a sizable portion of the globe. WW3 is a veritable death sentence.
    I and hopefully along with most of John Q. Public agrees with you on that. Doesn't mean that TPTB who bought and paid for all of our lovely leaders in DC might not think its a bad idea.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by enhanced_deficit View Post
    Do you agree with that? Would you also oppose US attacking Iran if it is close to getting same nuclear capacity as Israel's?

    I'm sure there will be some Israelis who also oppose US attack on Iran for Israel's security. But majority in israel, Joe Lieberman, David Horowitz, John Hagee, Mccain, Rafael Cruz, Bill Krystal, AIPAC, CUFI and many others would disagree strongly.
    He will get back to you on that question after he sees what Glenn Beck wants to do.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    Nope. This is about WW3. No sane person wants World War 3, aside from Benny Netanyahu, Prince Bendar and the Obama's Fabian Society. If this moron flings cruise missiles in there, all bets are off.
    Why does Saudi Arabia want WWIII?
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  21. #18
    She is 100% right and used almost the exact wording I would.

  22. #19
    I love your, Sarah.

    This woman gets it.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by twomp View Post
    He will get back to you on that question after he sees what Glenn Beck wants to do.
    lolz Beck is currently a peace monger and opposes US fighting wars for other countries security.


    Quote Originally Posted by 69360 View Post
    She is 100% right and used almost the exact wording I would.
    You would say same I hope when Palin blasts Iran warmongers and opposes Obama's/neocons Iran attack fantasy.

  24. #21
    Supporting Member
    Phoenix, AZ
    Cleaner44's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    4
    Posts
    8,594
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by enhanced_deficit View Post
    Wow, all this time I wrongly assumed she was a big supporter of Israel's security.

    Insight: As Obama blinks on Syria, Israel, Saudis make common cause
    JERUSALEM/RIYADH | Mon Sep 2, 2013 8:52am EDT
    (Reuters) - If President Barack Obama has disappointed Syrian rebels by deferring to Congress before bombing Damascus, he has also dismayed the United States' two main allies in the Middle East. Israel and Saudi Arabia..

    Israel's state-run Army Radio was more explicit: "If Obama is hesitating on the matter of Syria," it said, "Then clearly on the question of attacking Iran, a move that is expected to be far more complicated, Obama will hesitate much more
    - and thus the chances Israel will have to act alone have increased."
    Bombing Syria will make Israel less safe in my opinion. The dream is to cleanly replace the Syrian government with a pro-Israel/pro-US government... but that isn't going to happen no matter what.
    Citizen of Arizona
    @cleaner4d4

    I am a libertarian. I am advocating everyone enjoy maximum freedom on both personal and economic issues as long as they do not bring violence unto others.

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Cleaner44 View Post
    Bombing Syria will make Israel less safe in my opinion. The dream is to cleanly replace the Syrian government with a pro-Israel/pro-US government... but that isn't going to happen no matter what.
    Their ultimate goal is attacking Iran, removing pro-Iran, Christian friendly Asad regime and generally weakening potential allies of Iran ( iraq, Lebanon, Syria and even Turkey) by instigating civil wars violence is part of neocons mideast gameplan.

  26. #23
    Well. I gotta admit. Palin seems to at least did a little bit a homework. See her slightly better now.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by enhanced_deficit View Post
    You would say same I hope when Palin blasts Iran warmongers and opposes Obama's/neocons Iran attack fantasy.
    Yes.

    I generally agree with Palin, not always.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-31-2013, 08:16 PM
  2. Suicide blasts in Syria kill at least 20 troops
    By alucard13mmfmj in forum World News & Affairs
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-11-2012, 04:14 PM
  3. Newt Gingrich Palin endorsed Newt (sort of) on Hannity
    By cindy25 in forum 2012 Presidential Election
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 01-18-2012, 10:20 PM
  4. Michele Bachmann Bachmann warmongers about the "new Axis of Evil": Iran, Syria, North Korea, China, Russia
    By rambone in forum 2012 Presidential Election
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-31-2011, 11:55 AM
  5. Alex Jones blasts Sarah Palin.
    By sofia in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 02-18-2010, 04:56 PM

Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •