Syria

rickyb

Well-Known Member
I'm guessing the US interest is the same as the rest of the civilized world, no chemical weapons as they cannot be targeted at solely military combatant. It is a protection for every non -combatant, you know women and children, old people and such. That's just kinda my guess.
US government, canada, uk, france dont give a :censored2: about morality or decency. especially US
 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
Americans are funny like that....they support their country!!!
difference between supporting your country (as if what the president wants is what the country wants) and supporting invasions.

invasions weaken america because it drives it further into debt and increases domestic terrorism.
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
difference between supporting your country (as if what the president wants is what the country wants) and supporting invasions.

invasions weaken america because it drives it further into debt and increases domestic terrorism.
The president wants everyone working......the country wants that too. The only ones who don't want that are the lazy couch potatoes who think they are owed a living!
 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
The president wants everyone working......the country wants that too. The only ones who don't want that are the lazy couch potatoes who think they are owed a living!
the president certainly doesnt want everyone working. what they say and what they actually want are 2 separate things.

for example during the great recession obama couldve easily brought down unemployment rates by fixing roads for example, but did not because it was not in his interest politically to do so.
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
the president certainly doesnt want everyone working. what they say and what they actually want are 2 separate things.

for example during the great recession obama couldve easily brought down unemployment rates by fixing roads for example, but did not because it was not in his interest politically to do so.
Our president would like to see the receivers of welfare have to work for it....so would I!!!
 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
Our president would like to see the receivers of welfare have to work for it....so would I!!!
well hes probably against welfare because it costs the rich tax money to fund.

and like i said in one sense a low unemployment rate makes him look good, but on the other hand there are limits to what he will do to employ people.
 
Top