Your Vote ATS'ers: Attack or Not To Attack Syria for Alleged Chemical Attacks on its Own Citizens?

reply to post by ItDepends


2) heck no we should not get involved unless getting involved means killing the true controllers of this world, and I do mean killing. Otherwise let's let Assad punish the devils responsible for this deplorable act.

NO

Obamas hasn't clarified what the Operation entails. There's no proof being provided to the public as to why they must strike Syria.

They lied before and this could all go terribly wrong.

reply to post by ItDepends


Not a no but a hell no

H-E - double hockey sticks. NO!!

Tabulation From Page 8:

Originally posted by ItDepends
Total Count of Polling After 7 pages:
ATTACK:

NO: 109

YES: 5

Non-Comm: 0

Total Count of Polling On Page 8:
ATTACK:

NO: 16

YES: 1

Non-Comm: 0

Total Count of Polling After 8 pages::
ATTACK:

NO: 125

YES: 6

Non-Comm: 2

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks ALL for participating. I'll keep on tracking your input!!

As I mentioned earlier, a lot of news to be shared over the next two days will continue to make this thread relevant. So it will be very interesting to see if any of these upcoming News/Talk Shows on Monday (At Least 6) and the Address to the Nation on Tuesday will influence the overwhelming sentiment of "NO" The U.S. should NOT attack Syria.

Source

The interview, Assad's first with an American television network in nearly two years, is scheduled to air on "The Charlie Rose Show" on PBS Monday — the same day President Barack Obama is scheduled to sit down with six different television networks, including PBS, to make his case to for a U.S. strike against Syria.

Source

Obama to address nation Tuesday on Syria

Having difficulty hitting the hay!! I am finding all of this so interesting and more and more input continues!!
Thank you!!

No, No way and of course No

Yes, my vote,..yes.

Neither side has clean hands,... doesnt matter which is right, they gassed their own innocents.

Pummel the crap out of them,.. then step back and observe the reaction, and if needed pummel them again.


I do feel for the collateral damage, but in this situation, there are no winners, just loosers,... and the immediate losers should be the ones that boomed the gas bomb.

Their society should figure it out from there.

No, But I find it troubling that people were more worked up over chemical weapons use almost 30 yrs after the fact than they are about attacks less than a month ago. Then again Syria doesn't produce oil like Iraq does.

And Syria doesnt produce sarin like the Russian Federation does.

reply to post by ItDepends

Additionally, I thought it would be convenient for those of you interested to just click a link to all of the News Outlets purporting to have interviews with President Obama on Monday, Sept. 9, 2013

Listed in no particular order: (I hope this is helpful)

CBS Evening News Link

CNN News Link

ABC News Link

Fox News Link

Charlie Rhodes PBS Link

PBS Inaugaration New Hour Debut with Gwen Ifill

Scheduled Interviews Above (sorry don't have times, did check POTUS schedule, not listed) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Other News Sites of Interest:

USA Today News Link

RT - Russian T.V. News Link

Al Jazeera - English Link

No! Recent history has shown us the mess that occurs when the USA goes to war.

I vote NO.

It's time for us to stop playing World Cop. I could care less who gassed who. Let them kill each other off.

None of them are worth the spilling of one drop of American blood, or of any Allied blood for that matter.

Let them take care of their own crap for once.

I wanted to put a stipulation...
I said no
I would however say yes for a UN lead strike. This is not threatening west, but it is threatening society and should be responded to if we are ever to have a united world.

So, however that works in this whole grand scheme of things

NO

What amazes me about this national "discussion" is Americans have never in my recollection been so united on anything, and in unbelievably overwhelming numbers the public says no. And when on ATS has there been this much consensus on anything?

Absolutely not. The US is not the world police, stay the hell out of other countries business. NO

No, not only no but HELL NO.

absolutely, positively, NO.

for any of the following reasons:

1. Kerry discloses that our Arab friends have offered to pay for the Strike on Syria
townhall.com...

2. Obama's brother Malik is financier/investor to MB world-wide
www.thegatewaypundit.com...

3. is it in the 'genes' ?? i've had enough of this Imperialism, have you ??
www.nydailynews.com...

4. High level intel says Syrian gov did NOT lauch chem attack
www.zerohedge.com...

5. March/April chemical attack by the rebels says UN rep/Del Ponte
if we didn't 'cross the red-line' then ... why now ??
link

6. Syria has large shale deposits clearly worth killing over
link

7. the Levant Basin
link

8. the ME pipeline conflicts
link
link 2
link 3

9. it is NOT OK to kill the enemies of our enemy, resulting in strengthening our enemy.
link
"It is not clear that the rebel forces, who we would be assisting, are our allies. In fact, it appears clear that the Syrian Opposition Forces are backed by Al-Qaida."
[quote from the link posted in the OP of the thread linked above]

10. Obama is more interested in advancing the TPP (TransPacific Partnership) than saving any lives
link

11. Chinese warships joining the party AND visiting Naval station in San Diego, CA
link

12. the Saudi/Pakistan nuke pact - 2003
link

i'm sure there are more but that's enough for this post.
Hell NO, we shouldn't go.

no

YES!

And since there are only what 5 other yes? can I double vote?

YES!

America has the largest army in the world

America was instrumental in the forming of the League of Nations, and its son the United Nations

America is the enforcer of the UN...and its real backbone. Without the US the UN would just be a bunch of stuffy potiltians that sit back, Monday quarterback shoulda beens

If congress votes no...then the spineless POTUS will be able to back down and say 'Im doing America's will' and then the use of weapons of mass destruction will now be 'sanctioned' by the U.S.

So...
Americans...I ask you....
If your next president (because the lord obama certainly wouldn't) chose to use pepper spray en mass on occupyers in NY and Portland....who would you look to.
Hey, how about instead of some irritating 'non-lethal' deterent he used Sarin gas on yous...what would ya do?
Cry to the UN to stop him?

ha ha hah ah nevermind...they are just a bunch of stuffy politicians that sit back and watch.
Yes America
Sit back, watch. Do nothing.
That is who we are becoming

The next time chemichal weapons are used in Syria....maybe Russia will step up and destroy the culprits with no prejudice

Maybe we outta let China step up to become the largest world military power and police the world.
We say we don't want to be world police...but let me ask you....who would you prefer to be world police?

X

reply to post by ItDepends


See this link for the Whip Count: Tracking Congressional Support for War With Syria
www.abovetopsecret.com...

You will be able to see who's voting for and against and who is still undecided , Skype numbers included with rep names , so you can call and pull then onto the NO VOTE.