Caribou Gear Tarp

Montana Dudes and Syria

BigHornRam

BigHornRam

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
13,721
Location
"Land of Giant Rams"
I called the office's of Senator Baucus and Senator Tester today to ask their position on Syria. Both said they had no position yet but were very interested in hearing what their constituents think. Seems like several posters here have direct access to Tester and Baucus' ear. Let them know what you think. Sounds like the Senate is going to vote first to put pressure on the House. Both Montana Senator's votes could make difference. Call today.
 
I'm not from MT but it is probably a waste of time to contact my current senators, due too the fact they will go long with whatever Kerry/Obama purpose. I'm not in favor of using our miltary to bomb Syria. Provide safety and resources for the victims, but let the terrorists kill each other off. There will never be peace in the middle east, and we are probably only a decade away from a major war.
 
What position should we take? If we oppose a strike against Assad, we support or forgive the use of checmical weapons on civiilians. If you support a strike on Assad and support the rebels, we are supporting Al Queada and the Muslim Brotherhood, Iran, Hessbolah, and every other far out towel head in the mid east. So what position is pro America?
 
Pro America is letting the Muslims kill each other off and we sit back and let them do it. I have no problems with them sorting out their own issues. Especially when it saves us from having to go over there but we still get the same results, dead extremist muslims.
 
I'm not from MT either but I think we shouldn't touch this. We have far too many problems here at home, I haven't talked to any family, friends, coworkers, etc yet that thinks we should go in there. I don't think any of those Syrians are worth ONE of our soldier's lives. It is kind of funny watching Kerry push for this war so much but wasn't supportive of Iraq. These career politicians make my head spin, I don't trust any of them and still am not convinced they have PROOF of chemical weapons. Pray for this country.
 
Agree with the comments above.

My thoughts on pro-American would not be selling jets and tanks to Egypt, sending air support to Bengazi on 9/11, using a percentage of the oil products from Lybia/Iraq to pay off our counties war debts and pay the servicemen for fighting, dropping MOABs on Iran nuclear sites, and stop providing foreign aid to counties that hate us.
 
Pagosa said:
Agree with the comments above.

My thoughts on pro-American would not be selling jets and tanks to Egypt, sending air support to Bengazi on 9/11, using a percentage of the oil products from Lybia/Iraq to pay off our counties war debts and pay the servicemen for fighting, dropping MOABs on Iran nuclear sites, and stop providing foreign aid to counties that hate us.
Click to expand...

im ok with all of this. Like some of the previous posts. . .they will never stop fighting over there. . .ever! waste of time, lives, and money. Fix our problems and quit being the worlds police force.
 
It's funny how the political partys have switched once again as well as most citizens. The people who were for going into Iraq (which everyone knew had nothing to do with 9/11 and they didn't find any WMDs) are now against going into Syria (because they aren't extra positive they have chemical weapons). Personally I don't think citizens should determine military action. I have little if any true information pertaining to Syria. Most people couldn't point it out on a map and these are the people who Senators and congressman should listen to vote yes or no on military action? I'll be honest, I have no opinion on this one...but I'm not going to make a judgment based on whether I like or dislike Obama/Kerry or whether they like it or dislike it.
 
MattK said:
Personally I don't think citizens should determine military action. I have little if any true information pertaining to Syria. Most people couldn't point it out on a map and these are the people who Senators and congressman should listen to vote yes or no on military action? I'll be honest, I have no opinion on this one...but I'm not going to make a judgment based on whether I like or dislike Obama/Kerry or whether they like it or dislike it.
Click to expand...

So why is Tester and Baucus holding their finger to the wind on this Matt? They are gutless politicians? Daines was clear from the get go on what it would take to get his support. Refreshing.
 
MattK said:
It's funny how the political partys have switched once again as well as most citizens. The people who were for going into Iraq (which everyone knew had nothing to do with 9/11 and they didn't find any WMDs) are now against going into Syria (because they aren't extra positive they have chemical weapons). Personally I don't think citizens should determine military action. I have little if any true information pertaining to Syria. Most people couldn't point it out on a map and these are the people who Senators and congressman should listen to vote yes or no on military action? I'll be honest, I have no opinion on this one...but I'm not going to make a judgment based on whether I like or dislike Obama/Kerry or whether they like it or dislike it.
Click to expand...

Matt,

Using that standard, nobody could pick out Iraq on a map either so why all the fuss about Bush's war in Iraq? He went to congress and got approval to use military force and a majority of Democrats voted with him.

Spending blood and treasure is the MOST important thing we the people should have an opinion on and voice it early and often to our elected representatives. As citizens of a Representative Republic we have every right to tell our congressman and senators our opinions and concerns in regards to committing our military to any foreign adventure.

The challenge here is that both sides are opposed to the U.S. It is probably a case where Assad is the better known known than the opposition which is a unknown known( per Rumsfled's explanantion).

Let Allah sort them out.

The House vote is going to require Pelosi to force some peaceniks to vote against their conscience and their constituents that will be interesting to see who is forced to the table.

Nemont
 
I like Rand Paul's position on this one...

Basically, we should go to war when either our country or our interests are attacked. We should not go to war just to "save face." Neither side here is our ally...why should we do anything that might risk American lives to help either of these sides? It's like one wolf pack fighting another wolf pack...I don't care who wins.

http://ideas.time.com/2013/09/04/sen-rand-paul-why-im-voting-no-on-syria/
 
We are broke... end of story. We cannot afford further damage to our economy and debt at this point. Military action is responsible for a huge amount of the debt already. I don't think it is inhumane to worry about those in need of our own citizens first, and when we are back on our feet we can go back to being the world's police if we can afford it.
 
This basically the equivalent of the Taliban fighting Al Queda. The problem is there are alot of innocent Syrians dying in the middle; which is a tragedy, but things like this happen all over the world everyday. We can't be responsible for all of it. We need to stay out.
 
Nemont- I agree with your judgment on Iraq. Time has shown that it was costly in both lives and money and the american people (coming off 9/11) made a bad judgment getting their representatives (both R's and D's) to support it. Further proof that citizens shouldn't be the "say" when it comes to military action unless they have all the information needed to make such a judgment. Military action should be the most difficult decision to make...and also the most non-political decision that is made. My hope is that whichever decision Baucus and Tester make, it is not based on whether they will get re-elected or what their constituents feel at the moment but instead on the best information (which I would assume a lot of being classified).
 
MattK said:
Nemont- I agree with your judgment on Iraq. Time has shown that it was costly in both lives and money and the american people (coming off 9/11) made a bad judgment getting their representatives (both R's and D's) to support it. Further proof that citizens shouldn't be the "say" when it comes to military action unless they have all the information needed to make such a judgment. Military action should be the most difficult decision to make...and also the most non-political decision that is made. My hope is that whichever decision Baucus and Tester make, it is not based on whether they will get re-elected or what their constituents feel at the moment but instead on the best information (which I would assume a lot of being classified).
Click to expand...

this is exactly what their decision will be based on. . . .it always is. Sad. . . . Its out of control right now. IMO, let them shoot, stab, bomb,gas,throw sand, or whatever else they want to do to kill each other off. We need to quit bombing these places and THEN giving them $ to rebuild. . .????
 
Lots of the men and women in congress had the exact same intel the Bush administration had and they decided to vote for the AUMF.

If it was a slam dunk to punish Assad for crossing a red line, well the President already has the power to punish Assad through the War Powers Act. The challenge is that this president got his rhetoric ahead of his timeline and now is looking for an accomplice to share the blame with.

Right or wrong it has nothing to do with whether you dislike or like President Obama, it has to do with how he has bungled the whole thing and stated a position that he now has to defend.

Watch the vote in the House, if Pelosi can't deliver a majority of the minority then the President is going to have a historic political defeat. Boehner will deliver enough votes to cross the finish line only if Pelosi forces her caucus to hold hands and jump off the cliff together. It is a political nightmare for her and she is being put in an impossible position.

If the red line is so important, then President Obama should have used the old adage: It is easier to ask for forgiveness then for permission.

Can anyone explain what exactly our policy on Syria or the middle east is under Obama? He seems to make it up as he goes.

Nemont
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
Please Help Habitat Montana
Replies
0
Views
516
Flynarrow
F
Elky Welky
Montana's Attorney General
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
5K
Elky Welky
Elky Welky
Visiting Hunter
King for a day, what would you do?
2
Replies
34
Views
952
Buffs35
Buffs35
cheeser
Wisconsin legislators press DNR board appointees on hunting wolves, cranes
Replies
17
Views
1K
Nicoli7153
N
Gerald Martin
Montana General Season Structure Proposal
51 52 53
Replies
1K
Views
40K
Sytes
Sytes
PEAX Trekking Poles

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,393
Messages
1,957,164
Members
35,154
Latest member
Rifleman270

Share this page

Back
Top