Syrian terrorists behead Catholic priest

[mugsy]

Except for the Franco-American Naval War that followed a few years later.

http://factcheck.org/2013/02/rand-pauls-bin-laden-claim-is-urban-myth/

As Reagan would say, "There you go again" , the Franco-American War did not involve the same government that had aided the nascent United States. Rather it was that blight upon mankind the French Revolutionary government that caused that quasi-war.

So, if you help a country, then have a regime change, then make unreasonable demands, things can turn sour but there is no direct line from A to B to C to D that was inevitable or predictable.

 

[RickN]

As Reagan would say, "There you go again" , the Franco-American War did not involve the same government that had aided the nascent United States. Rather it was that blight upon mankind the French Revolutionary government that caused that quasi-war.

So, if you help a country, then have a regime change, then make unreasonable demands, things can turn sour but there is no direct line from A to B to C to D that was inevitable or predictable.

Actually it was the US refusing to pay the new government what their old government said we owed for their help.

 

[mugsy]

Actually it was the US refusing to pay the new government what their old government said we owed for their help.

It wasn't just a new government - it was a change of regime from a traditional monarchy to a radical (even by modern standards) bloodthirsty collectivist regime.
One could very reasonably argue that the debt ended when the monarchy was abolished.
In addition, I don't think a large bribe to the foreign minister was part of our debt to France.

Hmmm...we have gotten rather far afield haven't we?

 

[RickN]

It wasn't just a new government - it was a change of regime from a traditional monarchy to a radical (even by modern standards) bloodthirsty collectivist regime.
One could very reasonably argue that the debt ended when the monarchy was abolished.
In addition, I don't think a large bribe to the foreign minister was part of our debt to France.

Hmmm...we have gotten rather far afield haven't we?

Most of the time when a government changes they are still expected to not only honor debts but collect what has been owed them too, but I do agree about the bribe. To tell the truth I do agree that helping people of other countries is not always a bad thing, I just do not think France/US was a good example.

Yes we have sort of wondered off track but then I am kind of surprised anyone is shocked by the OP. It happens all the time just not usually to a priest.

 

[ez bake]

Yep I used part of that too but like a lot of stuff online you have to decide who to believe because most will spin it.

This is the clearest example of how to drown from both irony and ******** at the same time.

 

[Glocktogo]

Shouldn't we let Allah and the Syrians sort it out?

Dude. are you like...from the future???

FWIW, the frequent American regime change has always been a source of consternation and concern for the rest of the world. How can other countries deal with the U.S. without fear, when in a few years time we may (and frequently do) drop them like a hot rock? Would you trust the U.S. if you were a nascent nation-state and were offered support with the real-world understanding that it could be withdrawn at any moment, and most likely at the most inopportune and damaging moment?

 

[RickN]

This is the clearest example of how to drown from both irony and ******** at the same time.

It is like the Downing Street Memo BS. When that story broke all of the anti-war crowd screamed that is proved Bush was lying and that Saddam did not have WMD. They either never bothered or did not expect anyone else to read the whole thing which in fact proved that they did think he had WMD and were worried he would use them on the first day, or against Kuwait and/or Israel. In other words pure spin based on just part of the info while totally ignoring the rest.

 

[ez bake]

It is like the Downing Street Memo BS. When that story broke all of the anti-war crowd screamed that is proved Bush was lying and that Saddam did not have WMD. They either never bothered or did not expect anyone else to read the whole thing which in fact proved that they did think he had WMD and were worried he would use them on the first day, or against Kuwait and/or Israel. In other words pure spin based on just part of the info while totally ignoring the rest.

Ricky, Ricky, Ricky, can't you see?


That statement needs no explanation whatsoever but coming from you of all people...

Let's just say that I'm going to start calling you DJ RickN because you spin professionally.

 

[RickN]

Ricky, Ricky, Ricky, can't you see?


That statement needs no explanation whatsoever but coming from you of all people...

Let's just say that I'm going to start calling you DJ RickN because you spin professionally.

I wish, then I would be rich and I could debate with smarter people.

Seriously man, if our side says we did not fund or arm OBL, and OBL and goons say we did not fund or arm them, it carries a lot more weight with me then the anti-war people saying we did.

As for the Downing Street Memo, most of the antis missed or ignored this part,

For instance, what were the consequences, if Saddam used WMD on day one, or if Baghdad did not collapse and urban warfighting began? You said that Saddam could also use his WMD on Kuwait. Or on Israel, added the Defence Secretary."

 

[ez bake]

I wish, then I would be rich and I could debate with smarter people.

Seriously man, if our side says we did not fund or arm OBL, and OBL and goons say we did not fund or arm them, it carries a lot more weight with me then the anti-war people saying we did.

As for the Downing Street Memo, most of the antis missed or ignored this part,

Who is arguing against us funding OBL? We backed the Mujahideen and they were cool enough with OBL to allow him and his people to stay there and fight along side (despite having issues with them, they at the very least tolerated them as the cause was common).

If we're backing Syrian Rebels, and they've got similar douche-bags along side them, then when we decide to change our minds and pull the rug out from under the "Star Trek Red Shirt" rebels, what do you think is going to happen whether we've paid a dime to the douche-bags or not?

Here's a hint - the last terrorist bombing in the US - it was from Serbia. How long has it been since we were in Serbia doing this same puppet-master dumbass stuff? We've only got a few more years before an Iraqi terrorist hits and we're already setting up the dominoes for the Syrian terrorists to hit us after that.

There are project managers for high-profile construction companies who couldn't create as perfect a ****-storm if they had years to plan it out.