Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA
No, uncas, how I knew it would go was that you would take anything said and present it in a way that contradicts the thoughts give to prolong an argument. Case in point...
Your argument in the Syria tread is that you don't think that the US should have acted against Libya but the fact that they have somehow makes them obliged to respond in the same way in Syria and every other middle-eastern country that violently suppresses protestors - including Iraq.
No, my argument was that OBAMA should not have acted against Libya. You may counter that with Obama IS America, being president, and the fact that we elected him makes his decisions our decisions. I will then counter that American people did NOT vote for going into Libya. Congress did not vote for going into Libya. It was all Obama;s decision. You may then take that and say..regardless, Obama speaks for America, being president, and you can keep the argument going for as long as you like, which seems to be you main objective.
I will stand by my flawed and absurd statement, as you so happily point out that it is. How can Obama not justify going into Syria, Iraq, Somalia, Iran, North Korea or ANY country experiencing internal strife by citizens demanding freedom, since that was his only reasoning for going into Libya? He can't, which means that his decision to go into Libya was a mistake on his part. WHen I pointed this out before, you countered with the statement that there WAS a positive going into Libya, to scare other countries....a fairy weak response I would say but it DID keep the what I consider to be your main reason for the thread, going...
That's how I knew it was going to go and that's how it went and that's why it doesn't interest me any longer.