Targeted, Precision Drone Strikes & The Responsibility to Protect Act.

Technically not true.

Most chemical weapons require some form of additive so to speak that allow the chemical component to manifest itself. The reasoning is simple...absent that, they would be of equal danger to the handlers.

Chemical weapons can often be neutralized by explosives.

Dj,

Bombs will not do that.  You can neutralize chemical weapons if they are primed with explosives individually, but bombing them and praying that all of the weapons are neutralized is lunacy.

Also it is true that certain chemical weapons have to be primed themselves with a catalyst, but there is no intelligence that these chemical stores have not been mobilized for use. 

If you are in the camp that believes that Assad is behind the chemical attacks, then it stands to reason that his chemical arsenal has been primed for use. 

Google Bunker 13 or "chemical Weapons Al-Muthanna Iraq"

No, you gave the typical right wing all or nothing response.

We would not bomb the chemical labs unless we knew that it was not primed for use.

Iraq was intentional. Syria would not be.

That's because as a right wing sheep, you view anything else as partisan. Make sure you run your response by 14Daroad or Slim for their approval. No doubt they directed you to use your current avator.

To respond to your post, I have said a zillion times that Bush was right in Iraq, with the exception of the post-war plans and that is exactly Obama's problem in Egypt and Syria with regime removal.

I have called Kerry inept, I have instead credited low level diplomats for any possible success in the current proposal.

I laugh at you right wingers who have suddenly turned dovish as opposed to hawkish because a dem is in charge in the same way I laugh at dems who have become hawkish and crucified Bush.

And I agreed with Club that on 9/11, you righties would have attacked anyone who used the day to discuss how Bush was at fault, instead of remembrance, yet Faux news and every rightie on this board was screaming Benghazi yesterday.

There is nothing partisan about my posts. You are just too far right to see that.

I think you are pretty moderate DJ,

But you never call the lefties out on their $hit so it makes you look like a liberal. 

You say you do, but if you do, it is in threads I don't see, and it is probably done politely without the venom you save for the "Right wingers".

That's because you pay far more attention to the threads critical of Obama, mostly because you are an active participant.

Ask Stilln about his Israeli threads. Ask Kaplan about his anti-Bush war criminal threads. The difference is that Obama is currently in charge so the anti-threads in a board that is far more right wing than left wing are more voluminous.

I abhor extremism and right now, it is far more 'right' than left. In the Bush years, it was the opposite.

My comments were about my opinion that we wouldnt bomb any chemical sites. I didnt say we wouldnt do it bc Obama is a democrat.

If you think I am a "righty" you go right ahead and believe that.

 Have a great day

There is no black/white answer to US intervention. It is always case by case. The key is what is to be achieved. Reagan/Haig became the first President to believe that all policy should be based on US interests and that a leader should be made to feel fear and marginalized rather than removed.

I cannot say that would have worked with SH at the time. Thus, I still believe US action was necessary and justified. The problem, as in Syria and Egypt is what happens after. As Powell said, you break it, you own it.