Civil War in Syria

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

What was the symbolism to the removal of the third star and reversal of red and green?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

It's official -the Obama administration is now focused on overthrowing Bashar al-Assad's regime. 

It's about time. 

The Obama administration should be focused on thee economy.

Multitasking is a thing that happens.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Regime describes battle in Aleppo as "Mother of All Battles" as Regime simultaneously struggles to regain control of Damascus.

They're seriously quoting Saddam circa 1990?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

How about dropping "bombs" that are just spray neutralizing agents into the air?

When you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

How is releasing an antidote anything other than excellent solution to the problem of somebody using chemical weapons on folks?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

How about dropping "bombs" that are just spray neutralizing agents into the air?

When you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

How is releasing an antidote anything other than excellent solution to the problem of somebody using chemical weapons on folks?

As London Man pointed out, that might be feasible in a Hollywood blockbuster, but not in real life.

Well, obviously I mean if and when possible. SPC may, I suppose (and hope), have been criticizing whatever thought process led BRTD to think that particular process is feasible, but it's SPC. He may very well have a grave moral opposition to administering antidotes to citizens of other countries in violation of those countries' self-determination for all I know.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

With nerve agents, deploying antidotes is risky.  If you give yourself the antidote because you think you've come in contact with one, but you haven't, then you can potentially kill yourself that way as well.

...that would in fact be a very good reason to have second thoughts about doing as BRTD suggested, were it possible. I stand at least partially corrected. Thank you, Ernest.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I was thinking of a certain Spec Ops level of Call of Duty 3 with that comment there.

I see.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I was thinking of a certain Spec Ops level of Call of Duty 3 with that comment there.

I see.

Glad to see you attacked me for questioning the reasoning of someone who makes strategic decisions based on a video game.

It was your motivations for questioning his reasoning that struck me as suspect.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I was thinking of a certain Spec Ops level of Call of Duty 3 with that comment there.

I see.

Glad to see you attacked me for questioning the reasoning of someone who makes strategic decisions based on a video game.

It was your motivations for questioning his reasoning that struck me as suspect.

What do you mean by my motivation? My immediate motivation of detecting faulty logic or my greater motivation of opposing a knee-jerk response to a complex situation? The thought process seemed to consist of 1) Assad might use chemical weapons, 2) The US drops bombs with relative ease, therefore 2) should be used to solve 1), hence my observation. You seem to have judged my motivations not based on the content of my post, but on your preconceived stereotype of my political philosophy.

I'll admit that I judged your motivations based on your political philosophy (as opposed to BRTD's motivations, which...defy complex analysis, and are profound in their simplicity, shall we say), so I'm sorry about that. I don't, however, think I have a 'preconceived stereotype' of what your political philosophy is, as I've talked with you on this forum a few times and read threads in which you talked with others quite a bit. Is it fair to assume, based on previous discussions and observations of your philosophy and positions, that you would oppose all or most forms of potential American involvement in the situation in Syria (Call of Duty 3-based or otherwise) on noninterventionist grounds? If so, I think my original broadside has merit, although I apologize for jumping the gun.