Other Resources The Political Joe » Syria Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 6
 
 
2013-09-05 7:57 PM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Syria

Hmmm, the plot thickens <tuwood adjusts tinfoil hat>

Rep. Alan Grayson: Syria Intelligence Manipulated



2013-09-06 9:15 AM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Veteran
1019
1000
St. Louis
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by tuwood

Hmmm, the plot thickens

Rep. Alan Grayson: Syria Intelligence Manipulated





(syria.jpg)



Attachments
----------------
syria.jpg (23KB - 9 downloads)
2013-09-06 9:44 AM
in reply to: kevin_trapp

User image

Expert
2180
2000100252525
Boise, Idaho
Subject: RE: Syria
I'm a (mostly) liberal, left-leaner and, so far, I have no major disagreements with anything that has been discussed on this thread....And that's kinda sad.  Cry
2013-09-06 10:41 AM
in reply to: jeffnboise

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Syria

Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm a (mostly) liberal, left-leaner and, so far, I have no major disagreements with anything that has been discussed on this thread....And that's kinda sad.  Cry

I read an article the other day that talked about how it used to be the D's versus the R's on everything, but it has shifted big time over the past several years to Authoritarians (R's & D's) vs. Libertarians.  Both the Dems and the Repubs are pretty much the exact same thing.  They both want to go to war, they both want to raise taxes, they both want to give money to buddy businesses, they both want to dictate to us what we can and can't do.

I have very strong positions on social issues, and I know that you do as well.  No matter what we say or do we probably won't convince each other to change our minds.  So, it's no more right for me to push my views on you through laws than it is for you to push yours on me through laws.  Hence, we agree to disagree and I do what I do and you do what we do and we all just get along.

I'm genuinely encouraged and hopeful that the people continue to shift towards the libertarian mindset which I feel is what we really need as a country.

2013-09-06 10:43 AM
in reply to: jeffnboise

User image

Elite
6387
50001000100100100252525
Subject: RE: Syria

Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm a (mostly) liberal, left-leaner and, so far, I have no major disagreements with anything that has been discussed on this thread....And that's kinda sad.  Cry

Huh. I thought you were conservative.... Wink

2013-09-06 12:06 PM
in reply to: dmiller5

User image

New user
21

Raleigh
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by dmiller5

oh man this one is just gold.

 

http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-assures-americans-this-will-not-be-another-1,33719/




Hadn't seen this until just now. Humor aside, they nailed it.


2013-09-06 12:13 PM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Expert
2180
2000100252525
Boise, Idaho
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm a (mostly) liberal, left-leaner and, so far, I have no major disagreements with anything that has been discussed on this thread....And that's kinda sad.  Cry

I read an article the other day that talked about how it used to be the D's versus the R's on everything, but it has shifted big time over the past several years to Authoritarians (R's & D's) vs. Libertarians.  Both the Dems and the Repubs are pretty much the exact same thing.  They both want to go to war, they both want to raise taxes, they both want to give money to buddy businesses, they both want to dictate to us what we can and can't do.

I have very strong positions on social issues, and I know that you do as well.  No matter what we say or do we probably won't convince each other to change our minds.  So, it's no more right for me to push my views on you through laws than it is for you to push yours on me through laws.  Hence, we agree to disagree and I do what I do and you do what we do and we all just get along.

I'm genuinely encouraged and hopeful that the people continue to shift towards the libertarian mindset which I feel is what we really need as a country.

You had me eating out of your hand.....until (there^) Did you HAVE to slip in the Libertarian 'sales pitch'?   lol

 

2013-09-06 12:16 PM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Expert
1416
1000100100100100
San Luis Obispo, CA
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm a (mostly) liberal, left-leaner and, so far, I have no major disagreements with anything that has been discussed on this thread....And that's kinda sad.  Cry

I read an article the other day that talked about how it used to be the D's versus the R's on everything, but it has shifted big time over the past several years to Authoritarians (R's & D's) vs. Libertarians.  Both the Dems and the Repubs are pretty much the exact same thing.  They both want to go to war, they both want to raise taxes, they both want to give money to buddy businesses, they both want to dictate to us what we can and can't do.

I have very strong positions on social issues, and I know that you do as well.  No matter what we say or do we probably won't convince each other to change our minds.  So, it's no more right for me to push my views on you through laws than it is for you to push yours on me through laws.  Hence, we agree to disagree and I do what I do and you do what we do and we all just get along.

I'm genuinely encouraged and hopeful that the people continue to shift towards the libertarian mindset which I feel is what we really need as a country.

I think I'm going to frame this Tony!  Very well stated.

2013-09-06 12:29 PM
in reply to: jeffnboise

User image

Elite
6387
50001000100100100252525
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by jeffnboise
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm a (mostly) liberal, left-leaner and, so far, I have no major disagreements with anything that has been discussed on this thread....And that's kinda sad.  Cry

I read an article the other day that talked about how it used to be the D's versus the R's on everything, but it has shifted big time over the past several years to Authoritarians (R's & D's) vs. Libertarians.  Both the Dems and the Repubs are pretty much the exact same thing.  They both want to go to war, they both want to raise taxes, they both want to give money to buddy businesses, they both want to dictate to us what we can and can't do.

I have very strong positions on social issues, and I know that you do as well.  No matter what we say or do we probably won't convince each other to change our minds.  So, it's no more right for me to push my views on you through laws than it is for you to push yours on me through laws.  Hence, we agree to disagree and I do what I do and you do what we do and we all just get along.

I'm genuinely encouraged and hopeful that the people continue to shift towards the libertarian mindset which I feel is what we really need as a country.

You had me eating out of your hand.....until (there^) Did you HAVE to slip in the Libertarian 'sales pitch'?   lol

 

Sales pitch?

Depends what you want to "label" as Libertarian. Libertarians are what Founded the country. They were not anti-government anarchists, they were simply for limited government. Today, we will never go back to 1800, nor do I want to.... but limiting government right now is a very good thing. They have gone unrestrained too long. For the pendulum to BEGIN to swing back the other direction is a good thing. It is the path we are on that has given us crushing debts, the Cold War, endless military engagements, and the Nanny State. That includes the NSA as much as it includes our entitlement culture.

Is applying brakes to a speeding train so ridiculous as to reject it out of hand?

2013-09-06 12:51 PM
in reply to: powerman

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by powerman
Originally posted by jeffnboise
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm a (mostly) liberal, left-leaner and, so far, I have no major disagreements with anything that has been discussed on this thread....And that's kinda sad.  Cry

I read an article the other day that talked about how it used to be the D's versus the R's on everything, but it has shifted big time over the past several years to Authoritarians (R's & D's) vs. Libertarians.  Both the Dems and the Repubs are pretty much the exact same thing.  They both want to go to war, they both want to raise taxes, they both want to give money to buddy businesses, they both want to dictate to us what we can and can't do.

I have very strong positions on social issues, and I know that you do as well.  No matter what we say or do we probably won't convince each other to change our minds.  So, it's no more right for me to push my views on you through laws than it is for you to push yours on me through laws.  Hence, we agree to disagree and I do what I do and you do what we do and we all just get along.

I'm genuinely encouraged and hopeful that the people continue to shift towards the libertarian mindset which I feel is what we really need as a country.

You had me eating out of your hand.....until (there^) Did you HAVE to slip in the Libertarian 'sales pitch'?   lol

 

Sales pitch?

Depends what you want to "label" as Libertarian. Libertarians are what Founded the country. They were not anti-government anarchists, they were simply for limited government. Today, we will never go back to 1800, nor do I want to.... but limiting government right now is a very good thing. They have gone unrestrained too long. For the pendulum to BEGIN to swing back the other direction is a good thing. It is the path we are on that has given us crushing debts, the Cold War, endless military engagements, and the Nanny State. That includes the NSA as much as it includes our entitlement culture.

Is applying brakes to a speeding train so ridiculous as to reject it out of hand?

Maybe Obama really is the great one.....the one who finally got everyone to say, "you know, these bastards are all the same"....and lead us all to dump both parties in favor of ideas that actually have a chance at working.

2013-09-06 12:53 PM
in reply to: powerman

User image

Expert
2180
2000100252525
Boise, Idaho
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by powerman
Originally posted by jeffnboise
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm a (mostly) liberal, left-leaner and, so far, I have no major disagreements with anything that has been discussed on this thread....And that's kinda sad.  Cry

I read an article the other day that talked about how it used to be the D's versus the R's on everything, but it has shifted big time over the past several years to Authoritarians (R's & D's) vs. Libertarians.  Both the Dems and the Repubs are pretty much the exact same thing.  They both want to go to war, they both want to raise taxes, they both want to give money to buddy businesses, they both want to dictate to us what we can and can't do.

I have very strong positions on social issues, and I know that you do as well.  No matter what we say or do we probably won't convince each other to change our minds.  So, it's no more right for me to push my views on you through laws than it is for you to push yours on me through laws.  Hence, we agree to disagree and I do what I do and you do what we do and we all just get along.

I'm genuinely encouraged and hopeful that the people continue to shift towards the libertarian mindset which I feel is what we really need as a country.

You had me eating out of your hand.....until (there^) Did you HAVE to slip in the Libertarian 'sales pitch'?   lol

 

Sales pitch?

Depends what you want to "label" as Libertarian. Libertarians are what Founded the country. They were not anti-government anarchists, they were simply for limited government. Today, we will never go back to 1800, nor do I want to.... but limiting government right now is a very good thing. They have gone unrestrained too long. For the pendulum to BEGIN to swing back the other direction is a good thing. It is the path we are on that has given us crushing debts, the Cold War, endless military engagements, and the Nanny State. That includes the NSA as much as it includes our entitlement culture.

Is applying brakes to a speeding train so ridiculous as to reject it out of hand?

Different Discussion/Different Thread! 



2013-09-06 12:58 PM
in reply to: jeffnboise

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by jeffnboise
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm a (mostly) liberal, left-leaner and, so far, I have no major disagreements with anything that has been discussed on this thread....And that's kinda sad.  Cry

I read an article the other day that talked about how it used to be the D's versus the R's on everything, but it has shifted big time over the past several years to Authoritarians (R's & D's) vs. Libertarians.  Both the Dems and the Repubs are pretty much the exact same thing.  They both want to go to war, they both want to raise taxes, they both want to give money to buddy businesses, they both want to dictate to us what we can and can't do.

I have very strong positions on social issues, and I know that you do as well.  No matter what we say or do we probably won't convince each other to change our minds.  So, it's no more right for me to push my views on you through laws than it is for you to push yours on me through laws.  Hence, we agree to disagree and I do what I do and you do what we do and we all just get along.

I'm genuinely encouraged and hopeful that the people continue to shift towards the libertarian mindset which I feel is what we really need as a country.

You had me eating out of your hand.....until (there^) Did you HAVE to slip in the Libertarian 'sales pitch'?   lol

 

lol, I did say the "libertarian mindset" and not the "libertarian party".

I know there are different views of what libertarianism is, and some of them do get a little out into whacky land.  I generally think of libertarianism as a belief in less government, free markets, civil liberties (individual rights), and not intervening in foreign conflicts.

At it's core Libertarianism is an antonym to authoritarianism and that is what we need, IMHO.

2013-09-06 1:07 PM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Expert
2180
2000100252525
Boise, Idaho
Subject: RE: Syria

I'm a (mostly) liberal, left-leaner and, so far, I have no major disagreements with anything that has been discussed on this thread....And that's kinda sad strange.  Surprised

 

 

2013-09-06 1:09 PM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image

Elite
6387
50001000100100100252525
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by Left Brain
Originally posted by powerman
Originally posted by jeffnboise
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm a (mostly) liberal, left-leaner and, so far, I have no major disagreements with anything that has been discussed on this thread....And that's kinda sad.  Cry

I read an article the other day that talked about how it used to be the D's versus the R's on everything, but it has shifted big time over the past several years to Authoritarians (R's & D's) vs. Libertarians.  Both the Dems and the Repubs are pretty much the exact same thing.  They both want to go to war, they both want to raise taxes, they both want to give money to buddy businesses, they both want to dictate to us what we can and can't do.

I have very strong positions on social issues, and I know that you do as well.  No matter what we say or do we probably won't convince each other to change our minds.  So, it's no more right for me to push my views on you through laws than it is for you to push yours on me through laws.  Hence, we agree to disagree and I do what I do and you do what we do and we all just get along.

I'm genuinely encouraged and hopeful that the people continue to shift towards the libertarian mindset which I feel is what we really need as a country.

You had me eating out of your hand.....until (there^) Did you HAVE to slip in the Libertarian 'sales pitch'?   lol

 

Sales pitch?

Depends what you want to "label" as Libertarian. Libertarians are what Founded the country. They were not anti-government anarchists, they were simply for limited government. Today, we will never go back to 1800, nor do I want to.... but limiting government right now is a very good thing. They have gone unrestrained too long. For the pendulum to BEGIN to swing back the other direction is a good thing. It is the path we are on that has given us crushing debts, the Cold War, endless military engagements, and the Nanny State. That includes the NSA as much as it includes our entitlement culture.

Is applying brakes to a speeding train so ridiculous as to reject it out of hand?

Maybe Obama really is the great one.....the one who finally got everyone to say, "you know, these bastards are all the same"....and lead us all to dump both parties in favor of ideas that actually have a chance at working.

God I hope so.

Look at what Bush did to the (R)s. I mean before 9-11... which was not long... the Rs got control after Clinton and it was like the second coming.. and look what they did with it. We were attacked... but what our response was, and where we went in 8 years... WOW. Surprised

Obviously, I have not been around long, but I can't think of another more contrasting shift of events... from Bush, to the most over hyped, over marketed candidate in history... the longest campaign, most money spent... all to elect the first mixed race President in US history.... and look how well that has gone. Once the buzz wore off and a trip to the toilet was needed... ya.

One can only hope it is sinking in.

2013-09-06 1:10 PM
in reply to: jeffnboise

User image

Elite
6387
50001000100100100252525
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by jeffnboise
Originally posted by powerman
Originally posted by jeffnboise
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm a (mostly) liberal, left-leaner and, so far, I have no major disagreements with anything that has been discussed on this thread....And that's kinda sad.  Cry

I read an article the other day that talked about how it used to be the D's versus the R's on everything, but it has shifted big time over the past several years to Authoritarians (R's & D's) vs. Libertarians.  Both the Dems and the Repubs are pretty much the exact same thing.  They both want to go to war, they both want to raise taxes, they both want to give money to buddy businesses, they both want to dictate to us what we can and can't do.

I have very strong positions on social issues, and I know that you do as well.  No matter what we say or do we probably won't convince each other to change our minds.  So, it's no more right for me to push my views on you through laws than it is for you to push yours on me through laws.  Hence, we agree to disagree and I do what I do and you do what we do and we all just get along.

I'm genuinely encouraged and hopeful that the people continue to shift towards the libertarian mindset which I feel is what we really need as a country.

You had me eating out of your hand.....until (there^) Did you HAVE to slip in the Libertarian 'sales pitch'?   lol

 

Sales pitch?

Depends what you want to "label" as Libertarian. Libertarians are what Founded the country. They were not anti-government anarchists, they were simply for limited government. Today, we will never go back to 1800, nor do I want to.... but limiting government right now is a very good thing. They have gone unrestrained too long. For the pendulum to BEGIN to swing back the other direction is a good thing. It is the path we are on that has given us crushing debts, the Cold War, endless military engagements, and the Nanny State. That includes the NSA as much as it includes our entitlement culture.

Is applying brakes to a speeding train so ridiculous as to reject it out of hand?

Different Discussion/Different Thread! 

OK

2013-09-09 9:32 AM
in reply to: jeffnboise

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by jeffnboise

I'm a (mostly) liberal, left-leaner and, so far, I have no major disagreements with anything that has been discussed on this thread....And that's kinda sad.  Cry


Yeah, me neither. A few things are becoming apparent to me:
--No one in the administration has an idea how to answer the, "Ok, say we strike. Then what?" question.
--We've been talking about this for weeks now. Any potential high-value targets are probably hundreds of feet underground in hardened bunkers by now, so I don't know what we'd be able to hit at this point anyway.
--The rebels aren't any more friendly to US interests than the Assad regime. As much as it would be great to get rid of a brutal tyrant, which Assad certainly is, the guys who would swoop into the power vacuum created by his ouster are at best radical islamists and at worst, Al Quaeda.


Sarah Palin was quoted the other day as saying that we should "let Allah sort it out". Governor Palin's typically ham-handed rhetoric aside, I actually agree with her.
And speaking of ham, I think a pig just flew by my window.


2013-09-09 12:07 PM
in reply to: jmk-brooklyn

User image

Expert
1186
1000100252525
North Cackalacky
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn

I actually agree with her.



In the words of Martin Riggs: "I'll bet that hurt to say."
2013-09-10 8:50 AM
in reply to: 0

User image

Pro
5755
50005001001002525
Subject: RE: Syria
Interesting discussion on BBC this morning. It is starting to look like a lot more happened between Putin and Obama at the G-20 than was previously reported.In talking about the new chemical weapons proposal, Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Barack Obama discussed the idea on the sidelines of a G20 summit last week, Mr Putin's spokesman said on Tuesday.

This morning an adviser to the Syrian Minister of Information said in an interview that they were influenced by the threat of force by the US and its allies and diplomatic discussions between Putin and Syria. Also it now appears that Kerry has been working with Lavrov on the language and details of the initiative.

I don't live in a world of unicorns, but I do hope that a diplomatic solution is reached. It also changes nothing for the civilians caught in the civil war. IMHO, I hope there is a proposal on humanitarian relief jointly sponsored by the US and Russia.

Hezbollah and the AQ sympathizers are then more than welcome to continue reducing their own numbers through conventional means.



Edited by BrianRunsPhilly 2013-09-10 8:57 AM
2013-09-10 11:06 AM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Pro
5755
50005001001002525
Subject: RE: Syria
The 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council had a problem. That problem isn't civil war in Syria, it's the potential problem is Assad loses control of his chemical weapons. None of the members want to see Islamic terrorists gain control of those weapons and subsequent attacks on their own soil.

A combination of military pressure from the US and political pressure from Russia provided the means to resolve the problem of chemical weapons in Syria. France is drafting the UN proposal, China has just offered security asistance.

The US and Russia are now going to sit back and let Assad and the rebels kill each other with conventional weapons, which they will sell them. Not a bad solution, actually.

Who wins? Everyone but Syria's civilians. But then again, unless it is in another country's military or economic interests, genocide has never been a reason for intervention. 

 

2013-09-10 12:34 PM
in reply to: BrianRunsPhilly

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by BrianRunsPhilly Interesting discussion on BBC this morning. It is starting to look like a lot more happened between Putin and Obama at the G-20 than was previously reported.In talking about the new chemical weapons proposal, Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Barack Obama discussed the idea on the sidelines of a G20 summit last week, Mr Putin's spokesman said on Tuesday.

This morning an adviser to the Syrian Minister of Information said in an interview that they were influenced by the threat of force by the US and its allies and diplomatic discussions between Putin and Syria. Also it now appears that Kerry has been working with Lavrov on the language and details of the initiative.

I don't live in a world of unicorns, but I do hope that a diplomatic solution is reached. It also changes nothing for the civilians caught in the civil war. IMHO, I hope there is a proposal on humanitarian relief jointly sponsored by the US and Russia.

Hezbollah and the AQ sympathizers are then more than welcome to continue reducing their own numbers through conventional means.

I do have to chuckle at the spin machines on both sides of this.  I was reading an article on a conservative news site and it was all about Kerry flubbed by giving Syria an out and Putin called his bluff and backed the administration in a corner.  every other word about obama failing.

Then the liberal media talking of Obama's brilliance in structuring this deal with Putin ahead of time at the summit and on and on.

Obviously I have no clue what is true, but with the net effect of a path that doesn't involve US military intervention on the table I'm very pleased with the result.  So gaff or intentional I don't really care; well done team Obama.

2013-09-10 2:51 PM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Elite
6387
50001000100100100252525
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by tuwood
Originally posted by BrianRunsPhilly Interesting discussion on BBC this morning. It is starting to look like a lot more happened between Putin and Obama at the G-20 than was previously reported.In talking about the new chemical weapons proposal, Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Barack Obama discussed the idea on the sidelines of a G20 summit last week, Mr Putin's spokesman said on Tuesday.

This morning an adviser to the Syrian Minister of Information said in an interview that they were influenced by the threat of force by the US and its allies and diplomatic discussions between Putin and Syria. Also it now appears that Kerry has been working with Lavrov on the language and details of the initiative.

I don't live in a world of unicorns, but I do hope that a diplomatic solution is reached. It also changes nothing for the civilians caught in the civil war. IMHO, I hope there is a proposal on humanitarian relief jointly sponsored by the US and Russia.

Hezbollah and the AQ sympathizers are then more than welcome to continue reducing their own numbers through conventional means.

I do have to chuckle at the spin machines on both sides of this.  I was reading an article on a conservative news site and it was all about Kerry flubbed by giving Syria an out and Putin called his bluff and backed the administration in a corner.  every other word about obama failing.

Then the liberal media talking of Obama's brilliance in structuring this deal with Putin ahead of time at the summit and on and on.

Obviously I have no clue what is true, but with the net effect of a path that doesn't involve US military intervention on the table I'm very pleased with the result.  So gaff or intentional I don't really care; well done team Obama.

I have never seen anything so ridiculous as the left and right on this issue. Completely bizarre.



2013-09-10 3:06 PM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Expert
2180
2000100252525
Boise, Idaho
Subject: RE: Syria
Originally posted by tuwood
Originally posted by BrianRunsPhilly Interesting discussion on BBC this morning. It is starting to look like a lot more happened between Putin and Obama at the G-20 than was previously reported.In talking about the new chemical weapons proposal, Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Barack Obama discussed the idea on the sidelines of a G20 summit last week, Mr Putin's spokesman said on Tuesday.

This morning an adviser to the Syrian Minister of Information said in an interview that they were influenced by the threat of force by the US and its allies and diplomatic discussions between Putin and Syria. Also it now appears that Kerry has been working with Lavrov on the language and details of the initiative.

I don't live in a world of unicorns, but I do hope that a diplomatic solution is reached. It also changes nothing for the civilians caught in the civil war. IMHO, I hope there is a proposal on humanitarian relief jointly sponsored by the US and Russia.

Hezbollah and the AQ sympathizers are then more than welcome to continue reducing their own numbers through conventional means.

I do have to chuckle at the spin machines on both sides of this.  I was reading an article on a conservative news site and it was all about Kerry flubbed by giving Syria an out and Putin called his bluff and backed the administration in a corner.  every other word about obama failing.

Then the liberal media talking of Obama's brilliance in structuring this deal with Putin ahead of time at the summit and on and on.

Obviously I have no clue what is true, but with the net effect of a path that doesn't involve US military intervention on the table I'm very pleased with the result.  So gaff or intentional I don't really care; well done team Obama.

Agreed. 

Perhaps...just perhaps...our voices WERE heard in this matter!

New Thread
Other Resources The Political Joe » Syria Rss Feed  
 
 
of 6
 
 
RELATED POSTS

Syria - WWCOJD?

Started by ScudRunner
Views: 1782 Posts: 15

2013-05-07 6:32 PM ChineseDemocracy