The three strikes rule may be in effect
“Right of self-defense?”
Here we go…#headdesk
Land bridges and conspiracy theories.
Rules of engagement.
“This method bears the signature of the regime, and that is what has allowed us to establish its responsibility in this attack.”
“These sweeping sanctions target the scientific support center for Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad’s horrific chemical weapons attack…”
“There was nothing that was going to stop Assad from killing our families…”
Gas attacks? No, we’re feeling fine, thank you.
Attack claims “100% fabrication.”
“We need to see Russia choose to side with the civilized world…”
“Assad committed suicide here.”
“This distinction does not much matter to the dead …”
“…let’s think about the possible reasons for Russia’s failure.”
“Not only does he have right, he has an obligation to act.”
“unconditional support is not possible in this current world”
“…he selected prisoners, most of them deathly ill, for a fate he called ‘justice.'”
“You don’t need significant number[s] to commit atrocities.”
Assad still standing.
The world he helped create.
“Whatever they say, it’s just lies and, let’s say, bubbles…”
“the administration seems to be throwing up roadblocks to our bipartisan effort to cut off the resources Assad uses to annihilate his own people”
“At least 37 children and ten women were among those hospitalized…”
Kurdish separatists or ISIS?
“What we have here are words on paper ….”
This should go swimmingly
The welcome wagon.
So much for the grand alliance.
“Vengeance is inevitable.”
This boat ain’t for real.
Dog and pony show
“I put ESPN in a bad spot…”
Reform or revolt?
Would you care to explain?